Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01239/USCOURTS-caed-2_23-cv-01239-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
State of California
Respondent
Samuel W. Tweedy
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

SAMUEL W. TWEEDY,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF CALIFORNIA,

Respondent.

Case No. 2:23-cv-01239-JDP (HC)

ORDER 

DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO 

RANDOMLY ASSIGN A DISTRICT JUDGE 

TO THIS MATTER

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

THAT THE PETITION BE DISMISSED 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO 

PROSECUTE AND FAILURE TO COMPLY 

WITH COURT ORDERS

OBJECTIONS DUE WITHIN FOURTEEN 

DAYS

On September 28, 2023, I screened petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus and

notified him that it failed to state a viable claim. ECF No. 8. I granted him thirty days to file an 

amended petition. Id. When petitioner did not timely file an amended petition, on December 1,

2023, I ordered him to show cause within twenty-one days why this action should not be 

dismissed for his failure to prosecute. ECF No. 9. I notified him that if he wished to continue 

with this action he must, within twenty-one days, file an amended petition. Id. I also warned him

that failure to comply with that order would result in a recommendation that this action be 

dismissed. Id. 

Case 2:23-cv-01239-WBS-JDP Document 10 Filed 01/17/24 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 deadline has passed, and petitioner has neither filed an amended petition nor 

otherwise responded to the December 1, 2023 order. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a 

United States District Judge to this case. 

Further, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that:

1. This action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to 

comply with court orders, for the reasons set forth in the court’s December 1, 2023 order. 

2. The Clerk of Court be directed to close the case.

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 of 

service of these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the 

court and serve a copy on all parties. Such document should be captioned “Objections to 

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response shall be served and filed 

within fourteen days of service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file 

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 

Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 

1991). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 16, 2024 

JEREMY D. PETERSON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:23-cv-01239-WBS-JDP Document 10 Filed 01/17/24 Page 2 of 2