(HC) Neidinger v. Salinas, No. 2:2009cv02031 - Document 10 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 05/06/10 ORDERING Clerk to randomly REASSIGN this case to a District Judge and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed w/ prejudice. Objections to these F&Rs due w/i 21 days; referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr,; Case REASSIGNED to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. and Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd for all further proceedings. Case number shall now read 2:09-cv-2031 MCE DAD. (Benson, A.)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC) Neidinger v. Salinas Doc. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM PHILLIP NEIDINGER, 11 12 13 14 Petitioner, vs. S.M. SALINAS, Warden, ORDER AND Respondent. 15 16 No. CIV S-09-2031 DAD P FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS / By order filed March 23, 2010, petitioner was ordered to file an amended petition 17 for a writ of habeas corpus within thirty days from the date of service of the order. The thirty day 18 period has now expired, and petitioner has not filed an amended application or otherwise 19 responded to the court’s order. 20 21 22 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign this case to a District Judge. Also, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 25 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty- 26 one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 2 Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the 3 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 4 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 DATED: May 6, 2010. 6 7 8 9 DAD:4 neid2031.fta 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
