Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01584/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01584-3/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Tom L. Carey
Respondent
Jesus Manuel Vasquez
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

JESUS MANUEL VASQUEZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

)

)

)

v. )

)

)

)

)

TOM L. CAREY, Warden, )

)

Respondent. )

 )

1:05-CV-1584 AWI LJO HC

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATION [Doc. #15]

ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT’S

MOTION TO DISMISS [Doc. #9]

ORDER DENYING PETITIONER’S

MOTION FOR STAY [Doc. #13]

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR WRIT

OF HABEAS CORPUS

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

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 

On May 2, 2006, the Magistrate Judge issued a Findings and Recommendation that

recommended Respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition be GRANTED, the petition for writ of

habeas corpus be DISMISSED without leave to amend, and Petitioner’s motion for stay be DENIED.

This 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

Case 1:05-cv-01584-AWI-LJO Document 16 Filed 07/07/06 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

U.S. District Court

 E. D. California cd 2

of service of the order. Over thirty (30) days have passed 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 May 2, 2006, is ADOPTED IN FULL; 

2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition is GRANTED;

3. Petitioner’s motion for stay is DENIED;

4. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without leave to amend; and

5. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to close this file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 6, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01584-AWI-LJO Document 16 Filed 07/07/06 Page 2 of 2