Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01423/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cv-01423-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kevin James Allen
Respondent
Charles Anthony Brooks
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

CHARLES ANTHONY BROOKS,

Petitioner,

v.

KEVIN JAMES ALLEN,

Respondent.

No. 2:16-cv-1423 JAM CKD P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

By order filed June 29, 2016, petitioner’s habeas application was dismissed and thirty 

days’ leave to file an amended application was granted. The thirty day period has now expired, 

and petitioner has not filed an amended application.

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 

prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 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, petitioner may file written 

objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate 

 

1

Petitioner did file a document entitled “Amended Petition,” (ECF No. 13) but the document is 

not an amended petition; instead, the document details petitioner’s request for a certificate of 

appealability.

Case 2:16-cv-01423-JAM-CKD Document 15 Filed 08/09/16 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

Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” In his objections petitioner may address whether a 

certificate of appealability should issue in the event he files an appeal of the judgment in this 

case. See Rule 11, Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (the district court must issue or 

deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant). 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: August 9, 2016

1

broo1423.fta

_____________________________________

CAROLYN K. DELANEY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:16-cv-01423-JAM-CKD Document 15 Filed 08/09/16 Page 2 of 2