(HC)Moss v. Mitchell, No. 2:2015cv00108 - Document 6 (E.D. Cal. 2015)

Court Description: ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows on 1/22/15 ORDERING that the clerk of the court randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action; RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge Troy L. Nunley; Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Dillon, M)

Download PDF
(HC)Moss v. Mitchell Doc. 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GREGORY A. MOSS, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:15-cv-0108 GGH P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS KELI MITCHELL, Respondent. 16 17 18 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. 19 The court’s records reveal that petitioner has previously filed an application for a writ of 20 habeas corpus attacking the conviction and sentence challenged in this case. Moss v. California 21 Dept. of Corrections, 2:10-cv-2128 GEB CHS P. The previous application was filed on April 5, 22 2010, and was denied on the merits on June 14, 2012. Before petitioner can proceed with the 23 instant application, he must move in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for 24 an order authorizing the district court to consider the application. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3). 25 Therefore, petitioner’s application must be dismissed without prejudice to its re-filing upon 26 obtaining authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 27 28 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the clerk of the court randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. 2 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 3 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 4 after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 5 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 6 Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the 7 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 8 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 9 Dated: January 22, 2015 10 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows 11 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 Moss0108.succ 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.