MOUSA v. PEOPLE, 2:14-cv-1474 WBS AC P. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20150428852
Visitors: 22
Filed: Apr. 27, 2015
Latest Update: Apr. 27, 2015
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . On March 20, 2015, in response to respondent's motion to dismiss, petitioner filed a "Notice of Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Without Prejudice" this habeas corpus action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. See ECF No. 26. Petitioner noted his intention to exhaust his "administrative" remedies before refiling his petition. On March 25, 2015, in an abundance of caution, this court informed petitioner of the requirement to exhaust state judicial re
Summary: ORDER ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . On March 20, 2015, in response to respondent's motion to dismiss, petitioner filed a "Notice of Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Without Prejudice" this habeas corpus action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. See ECF No. 26. Petitioner noted his intention to exhaust his "administrative" remedies before refiling his petition. On March 25, 2015, in an abundance of caution, this court informed petitioner of the requirement to exhaust state judicial rem..
More
ORDER
ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.
On March 20, 2015, in response to respondent's motion to dismiss, petitioner filed a "Notice of Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss Without Prejudice" this habeas corpus action filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. See ECF No. 26. Petitioner noted his intention to exhaust his "administrative" remedies before refiling his petition.
On March 25, 2015, in an abundance of caution, this court informed petitioner of the requirement to exhaust state judicial remedies before commencing a federal habeas action, and of the potential consequences for dismissing this action at this time. See ECF No. 27. The court noted that "[d]ue to petitioner's possible confusion concerning the requirement that he exhaust his claims before coming to this court, he will be given an opportunity to reassess his request before obtaining dismissal of this action." Id. at 2. Petitioner was accorded 21 days within which file and serve a statement confirming his request for voluntary dismissal or an opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss; the court noted that "[f]ailure to timely respond to this order will be construed as confirmation of petitioner's request to voluntarily dismiss this action without prejudice." Id.
The deadline for responding to the court's order has expired and petitioner has not responded.1
Accordingly IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is voluntarily dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2).
FootNotes
1. Plaintiff, who remains incarcerated at California State Prison Solano, was timely served with the court's March 25, 2015 order. See Docket Entry following entry of court's March 25, 2015 order. See also http://inmatelocator.cdcr.ca.gov/ (Inmate Locator website operated by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation). This Court may take judicial notice of facts that are capable of accurate determination by sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. Fed. R. Evid. 201; see also City of Sausalito v. O'Neill, 386 F.3d 1186, 1224 n.2 (9th Cir. 2004) ("We may take judicial notice of a record of a state agency not subject to reasonable dispute.").
Source: Leagle
