(HC)Tomasello v. Haviland, No. 2:2010cv00166 - Document 19 (E.D. Cal. 2011)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 4/7/11 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice; 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus referred to Judge John A. Mendez; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

Download PDF
(HC)Tomasello v. Haviland Doc. 19 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 BRIAN TOMASELLO, 11 12 13 14 15 16 Petitioner, No. CIV S-10-0166 JAM EFB P vs. J. W. HAVILAND, Respondent. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / By order filed February 11, 2011, petitioner was ordered to show cause, within thirty 17 days, why his action should not be dismissed as moot. The thirty day period has now expired, 18 and petitioner has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 19 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 21 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 22 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 23 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 24 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 25 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 26 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). In 2 his objections petitioner may address whether a certificate of appealability should issue in the 3 event he files an appeal of the judgment in this case. See Rule 11, Federal Rules Governing 4 Section 2254 Cases (the district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it 5 enters a final order adverse to the applicant). 6 DATED: April 7, 2011. 7 8 9 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.