Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00845/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00845-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MIGUEL WHITE,

Petitioner,

v.

UNKNOWN,

Respondents.

No. 2:14-cv-0845 DAD P

ORDER AND

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On May 13, 2014, the court ordered petitioner to file within thirty days a petition for writ 

of habeas corpus that complies with the requirements of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice. The court also ordered 

petitioner to submit within thirty days an application to proceed in forma pauperis or the filing fee 

in the amount of $5.00. The thirty day period has now expired, and petitioner has not complied

with the court’s order or otherwise responded to it.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to 

randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See

Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 

assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 

Case 2:14-cv-00845-TLN-AC Document 4 Filed 06/25/14 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that 

failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 

Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: June 24, 2014

DAD:9

whit0845.156nopet

Case 2:14-cv-00845-TLN-AC Document 4 Filed 06/25/14 Page 2 of 2