(HC) Christopher Duane Bakken v. Scribner, No. 1:2005cv01133 - Document 66 (E.D. Cal. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING 64 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, Granting in Part and Denying in Part Respondents' 50 Motion to Dismiss, and Referring Matter Back to Magistrate Judge for Further Proceedings signed by Judge Oliver W. Wanger on 03/04/2011. (Flores, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Christopher Duane Bakken v. Scribner Doc. 66 1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 CHRISTOPHER DUANE BAKKEN, 10 11 1:05-cv-1133 OWW DLB HC Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS, AND REFERRING MATTER BACK TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS v. 12 A. K. SCRIBNER, et.al., 13 Respondents. 14 [Doc. 64] / 15 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant 16 to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is represented by Meredith Fahn, Esq. 17 On January 21, 2011, the Magistrate Judge issued Findings and Recommendation that the 18 Motion to Dismiss be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. This Findings and 19 Recommendation was served on all parties and contained notice that any objections were to be 20 filed within thirty (30) days of the date of service of the order. Over thirty (30) days have passed 21 and no party has filed objections. 22 In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted 23 a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court finds that the 24 Findings and Recommendation is supported by the record and proper analysis. 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 26 1. The Findings and Recommendation issued January 21, 2011, is ADOPTED IN 27 FULL; 28 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 2. 2 3 prejudice; 3. 4 5 Claims One and Two of the Second Amended Petition are DISMISSED without Respondent’s motion to dismiss Grounds Three and Five of the Second Amended Petition is DENIED; and 4. The matter is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: March 4, 2011 emm0d6 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
