Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Yao v. Aiken, 2:15-cv-2696-GEB-EFB P. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160506981 Visitors: 9
Filed: May 05, 2016
Latest Update: May 05, 2016
Summary: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS EDMUND F. BRENNAN , Magistrate Judge . Petitioner, proceeding without counsel, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. On March 11, 2016, respondent moved to dismiss on the ground that the petition is moot. On April 13, 2016, the court informed petitioner of the requirements for filing an opposition to any motion to dismiss. That order gave petitioner 21 days to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition and warned petitioner that fai
More

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Petitioner, proceeding without counsel, seeks a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

On March 11, 2016, respondent moved to dismiss on the ground that the petition is moot. On April 13, 2016, the court informed petitioner of the requirements for filing an opposition to any motion to dismiss. That order gave petitioner 21 days to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition and warned petitioner that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed.

The 21 days have passed and petitioner has not filed an opposition or a statement of no opposition nor otherwise responded to the April 13, 2016, order.1

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Rule 12, Rules Governing § 2254 Cases.

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 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." Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 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).

FootNotes


1. Although it appears from the file that petitioner's copy of the order was returned, petitioner was properly served. It is the petitioner's responsibility to keep the court apprised of a current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer