Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02460/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-02460-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Scott Frauenheim
Respondent
Cesar Santana
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CESAR SANTANA,

Petitioner,

v.

SCOTT FRAUENHEIM,

Respondents.

No. 2:14-cv-2460 GEB CKD P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for writ of habeas 

corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On December 29, 2014, respondent filed a motion to 

dismiss. On February 10, 2015, petitioner was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of 

non-opposition to the pending motion within thirty days. In the same order, petitioner was 

informed that failure to file an opposition would result in a recommendation that this action be 

dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The thirty day period has now expired, and petitioner 

has not responded to the court’s order. 

For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be 

dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 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 

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

Case 2:14-cv-02460-GEB-CKD Document 15 Filed 03/24/15 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

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.” Any response to the 

objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after 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. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

Dated: March 24, 2015

1

sant2460.146.146frs

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:14-cv-02460-GEB-CKD Document 15 Filed 03/24/15 Page 2 of 2