-GGH (HC) Corona v. McDonald, No. 2:2010cv02255 - Document 9 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 12/7/2010 recommending that this action be dismissed re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Eleazar Pinon Corona. Referred to Judge Damrell, Jr.. Objections to F&R due w/in 14 days. (Matson, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-GGH (HC) Corona v. McDonald Doc. 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ELEAZAR PINON CORONA, 11 Petitioner, 12 13 No. CIV S-10-2255 GGH P vs. M.D. McDONALD, 14 Respondent. 15 FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS / 16 By order filed September 14, 2010, petitioner’s application was dismissed and 17 thirty days’ leave to file an amended application was granted. The thirty day period has now 18 expired, and petitioner has not filed an amended application or otherwise responded to the 19 court’s order. 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. 21 See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Clerk is directed to assign a district judge to this 22 case. 23 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 24 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 25 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 26 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served 2 within fourteen days after service of the objections. Petitioner is advised that failure to file 3 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 4 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 DATED: December 7, 2010 6 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 7 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 8 GGH:035 coro2255.fta 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.
