(HC) Vang v. Gower, No. 2:2013cv01317 - Document 13 (E.D. Cal. 2013)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 12/24/13 recommending that petitioner's application for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed. Referred to Judge Kimberly J. Mueller. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 SONG VANG, 12 13 14 No. 2:13-cv-1317 KJM CKD P Petitioner, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS R. GOWER, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with an application for writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On September 24, 2013, respondent filed a motion to 19 dismiss. On November 12, 2013, the court ordered petitioner to file a response to the motion 20 within 30 days. Petitioner was warned that failure to file a response would result in a 21 recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil 22 Procedure. The 30-day period has expired and petitioner has not filed a response to the pending 23 motion to dismiss. 24 25 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that petitioner’s application for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed. 26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 28 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 1 1 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 2 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” In his objections petitioner 3 may address whether a certificate of appealability should issue in the event he files an appeal of 4 the judgment in this case. See Rule 11, Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (the district 5 court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the 6 applicant). Any response to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after 7 service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the 8 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 9 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 10 Dated: December 24, 2013 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 vang1317.146(a) 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.