(HC) White v. Unknown, No. 2:2014cv00845 - Document 4 (E.D. Cal. 2014)

Court Description: ORDER AND FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 6/24/2014 DIRECTING the Clerk to randomly assign a US District Judge to this action; and RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Assigned and Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections due within 14 days. (Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MIGUEL WHITE, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:14-cv-0845 DAD P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND UNKNOWN, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Respondents. 16 17 On May 13, 2014, the court ordered petitioner to file within thirty days a petition for writ 18 of habeas corpus that complies with the requirements of the Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases, 19 the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Local Rules of Practice. The court also ordered 20 petitioner to submit within thirty days an application to proceed in forma pauperis or the filing fee 21 in the amount of $5.00. The thirty day period has now expired, and petitioner has not complied 22 with the court’s order or otherwise responded to it. 23 24 25 26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 27 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 1 1 after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 2 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 3 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that 4 failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 5 Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 Dated: June 24, 2014 7 8 9 DAD:9 whit0845.156nopet 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.