Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02141/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-02141-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Conrad M. Graber
Respondent
James O. Molen
Petitioner

Document Text:

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

JAMES O. MOLEN,

Petitioner,

v.

CONRAD M. GRABER,

Respondent.

No. 2:15-cv-2141 KJM CKD P

ORDER AND 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

On November 6, 2015, petitioner was ordered to file a request to proceed in forma 

pauperis or pay the $5.00 filing fee for the action within thirty days. Petitioner was warned that 

failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Petitioner has 

neither filed a request to proceed in forma pauperis nor paid the filing fee.

Furthermore, petitioner fails to state any valid basis for relief. While it is not entirely 

clear, it appears that petitioner is seeking a writ of habeas corpus on the ground that the district 

court judge in his criminal action, 2:12-cr-0252 TLN, did not have subject matter jurisdiction to 

sentence petitioner. If that is petitioner’s claim, petitioner would have to file a motion in his 

criminal case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, not initiate a separate action as he has done here. See

Porter v. Adams, 244 F.3d 1006 (9th Cir. 2001). 

/////

/////

Case 2:15-cv-02141-KJM-CKD Document 16 Filed 04/06/16 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

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that all outstanding motions 

(ECF Nos. 13-15) are denied; and 

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

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 

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

objections with the court. The 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: April 6, 2016

1

mole2141.dis

 

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-02141-KJM-CKD Document 16 Filed 04/06/16 Page 2 of 2