Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06752/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06752-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
R. Campbell
Respondent
Joshua Javius
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

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSHUA JAVIUS, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

v. )

)

)

R. CAMPBELL, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

CV F 04 6752 OWW LJO HC 

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION 

[Doc. #4]

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT

TO ENTER JUDGMENT 

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On March 3, 2005, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation that the 

petition for writ of habeas corpus be DISMISSED for failure to comply with a court order.

Specifically, the Court found Petitioner had failed to submit a certified copy of his prison trust

account, or in the alternative, pay the five dollar ($5.00) filing fee as ordered by the Court on January

20, 2005. The Findings and Recommendation was served on all parties and contained notice that any

objections to the Findings and Recommendation were to be filed within thirty (30) days of the date

of service of the order. 

Case 1:04-cv-06752-OWW -LJO Document 9 Filed 06/22/05 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

U.S . District Court

 E. D . California cd 2

On April 7, 2005, Petitioner filed a request for an extension of time to file objections.

On April 20, 2005, the Magistrate Judge granted an extension of time of thirty (30) days in

which to file objections. On May 6, 2005, the order served on Petitioner was returned by the U.S.

Postal Service as undeliverable. The following remark was stamped on the returned mail: “RETURN

TO SENDER - Not at this address; Trans to CMC, PO Box 8101, San Luis Obispo, CA 93409.” 

The Clerk of Court re-served the order on Petitioner at this new address. However, over thirty (30)

days have passed yet again, and no party has filed objections.

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

novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the Findings

and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation issued December 7, 2004, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without prejudice; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: June 21, 2005 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06752-OWW -LJO Document 9 Filed 06/22/05 Page 2 of 2