PHA v. SWARTHOUT, 2:13-cv-1133-MCE-EFB P. (2014)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20140318776
Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 17, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 17, 2014
Summary: ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge. Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On February 7, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the
Summary: ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge. Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. On February 7, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the ..
More
ORDER
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge.
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding through counsel, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On February 7, 2014, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. Neither party has filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
1. The findings and recommendations filed February 7, 2014, are adopted in full;
2. Respondent's motion to dismiss (ECF No. 14) is denied;
3. Respondent is directed to file an answer within 60 days from the date of this order; and
4. Petitioner's reply, if any, is due within 30 days thereafter.
Source: Leagle
