Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02290/USCOURTS-caed-2_19-cv-02290-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Ralph D. Moreland
Petitioner
Unknown
Respondent

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

RALPH D. MORELAND,

Petitioner,

v.

UNKNOWN,

Respondent.

No. 2:19-cv-02290 JAM GGH P

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. The matter was referred to the United 

States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302(c). 

On November 12, 2019, petitioner filed a motion for extension of time to file his writ of 

habeas corpus. ECF No. 1. On December 9, 2019, the court denied the motion for extension of 

time and granted petitioner thirty days from the date of the order to file an in forma pauperis 

affidavit or pay the required filing fee, and file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in order to 

properly commence his federal habeas action. ECF No. 3. Petitioner was warned that failure to 

comply with the court’s order and deadlines would result in a recommendation that this matter be 

dismissed. Id. at 3. Petitioner did not respond. On January 30, 2020, the undersigned issued 

Findings and Recommendations recommending dismissal due to petitioner’s failure to respond to 

court orders or take any action to prosecute this case. ECF No. 5. On March 3, 2020, petitioner 

filed late objections. ECF No. 6. Petitioner, however, did not file his federal habeas petition to

Case 2:19-cv-02290-JAM-GGH Document 8 Filed 05/18/20 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

properly commence this action and an application to proceed in forma pauperis, or pay the 

required filing fee, as instructed by this court on December 9, 2019. Nevertheless, the court 

afforded petitioner one more opportunity to properly file a federal habeas petition and an 

application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the required fee in accordance with the court’s 

December 9, 2019 order. ECF No. 7. Petitioner was further warned that failure to comply with the 

court’s deadlines and orders would risk the undersigned issuing findings and recommendations 

recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or to follow a court order 

pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(b). Id. at 2. Petitioner has not responded to the 

court’s orders, nor taken any action to prosecute this case.

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

prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.

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. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 

Findings and Recommendations.” 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: May 18, 2020

 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:19-cv-02290-JAM-GGH Document 8 Filed 05/18/20 Page 2 of 2