Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01380/USCOURTS-caed-1_19-cv-01380-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Nathan Allen
Defendant
Romulo Estuardo Coronado Sanchez
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

ROMULO ESTUARDO CORONADO 

SANCHEZ,

Petitioner,

v.

NATHAN ALLEN, Warden,

Respondent.

No. 1:19-cv-01380-LJO-SKO (HC)

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. No. 14)

ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S 

MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. No. 10)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR 

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS 

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT 

TO ENTER JUDGMENT AND CLOSE 

CASE

[NO CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY 

IS REQUIRED]

Petitioner is an immigration detainee proceeding in propria persona with a petition for writ 

of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On January 7, 2020, the Magistrate Judge 

assigned to the case issued Findings and Recommendation to grant Respondent’s motion to 

dismiss the petition as moot. (Doc. Nos. 10, 14.) This Findings and Recommendation was 

served upon all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be filed within fourteen 

(14) days from the date of service of that order. To date, no party has filed objections. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a 

de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes that 

Case 1:19-cv-01380-LJO-SKO Document 15 Filed 01/29/20 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

the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper 

analysis. 

The Court notes that in the event a notice of appeal is filed, a certificate of appealability is 

not required since this is a § 2241 habeas proceeding, and not a habeas proceeding in which the 

detention complained of arises out of process issued by a State court. Forde v. U.S. Parole 

Commission, 114 F.3d 878 (9th Cir. 1997); see Ojo v. INS, 106 F.3d 680, 681-682 (5th Cir. 

1997); Bradshaw v. Story, 86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir. 1996). 

Accordingly, the Court orders as follows:

1. The Findings and Recommendations, filed January 7, 2020 (Doc. No. 14), is 

ADOPTED IN FULL;

2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 10) is GRANTED;

3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED as moot; 

4. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to ENTER JUDGMENT and close the file; and,

5. No certificate of appealability is required.

This order terminates the action in its entirety.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 28, 2020 /s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill _____ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:19-cv-01380-LJO-SKO Document 15 Filed 01/29/20 Page 2 of 2