Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06559/USCOURTS-caed-1_04-cv-06559-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Raymond Andrews
Respondent
Federico Hernandez
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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

)

FEDERICO HERNANDEZ, )

)

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. )

)

)

RAYMOND ANDREWS, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

CV F 04-6559 AWI WMW HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS RE PETITION FOR

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

[Doc. 17]

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a Petition for Writ of Habeas

Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302. 

On March 13, 2006, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein. 

These findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice to the

parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty

days. On March 24, 2006, Petitioner’s copy of the findings and recommendations were returned

as undeliverable by the United States Postal Service with the notation “inmate gone.” Service at

a petitioner’s address of record is fully effective. Local Rule 83-182(f).

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

de novo review of this case. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454

Case 1:04-cv-06559-AWI-WMW Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 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

(9th Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and

recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. 

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on 

 March 13, 2006, are a adopted in full;

2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is dismissed for failure to prosecute;

3. All pending motions are DENIED; and

3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Respondent and to close this

case. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 29, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:04-cv-06559-AWI-WMW Document 19 Filed 05/31/06 Page 2 of 2