Raul Figueroa Silva v. Dave Davey
Filing
18
ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald. The Court accepts and adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. It is Ordered that Judgment be entered denying and dismissing the First Amended Petition without prejudice. (Attachments: # 1 R&R) (sp)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
RAUL FIGUEROA SILVA,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
v.
)
)
DAVE DAVEY, Warden,
)
)
)
Respondent.
)
______________________________)
NO. CV 14-6105-MWF(E)
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
17
18
This Report and Recommendation is submitted to the Honorable
19
Michael W. Fitzgerald, United States District Judge, pursuant to 28
20
U.S.C. section 636 and General Order 05-07 of the United States
21
District Court for the Central District of California.
22
23
PROCEEDINGS
24
25
Petitioner filed a “First Amended Petition for Writ of Habeas
26
Corpus by a Person in State Custody” on September 8, 2014.
27
filed an Answer on January 7, 2015.
28
to the Answer within the allotted time.
Respondent
Petitioner failed to file a Reply
1
On February 3, 2015, the Magistrate Judge ordered that Petitioner
2
file a Reply to the Answer within twenty (20) days of February 3,
3
2015.
4
“may result in the denial and dismissal of the Petition.”
5
Nevertheless, Petitioner again failed to file a Reply to the Answer
6
within the allotted time.
The Magistrate Judge cautioned Petitioner that failure to do so
7
DISCUSSION
8
9
10
The First Amended Petition should be denied and dismissed without
11
prejudice.
Petitioner has failed to file a timely Reply, despite a
12
court order that he do so.
13
the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases by dismissing actions
14
for failure to prosecute.
15
(1962).
16
Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-62 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S.
17
915 (1992), and has concluded that dismissal without prejudice is
18
appropriate.
19
effective under the circumstances of this case.
The Court has inherent power to achieve
Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30
The Court has considered the factors recited in Ferdik v.
In particular, any less drastic alternative would not be
20
RECOMMENDATION
21
22
23
For all of the foregoing reasons, IT IS RECOMMENDED that the
24
Court issue an Order: (1) accepting and adopting this Report and
25
///
26
///
27
///
28
///
2
1
Recommendation; and (2) directing that Judgment be entered denying and
2
dismissing the First Amended Petition without prejudice.
3
4
DATED: March 2, 2015.
5
6
7
_______________/S/_________________
CHARLES F. EICK
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
1
2
NOTICE
Reports and Recommendations are not appealable to the Court of
3
Appeals, but may be subject to the right of any party to file
4
objections as provided in the Local Rules Governing the Duties of
5
Magistrate Judges and review by the District Judge whose initials
6
appear in the docket number.
7
Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure should be filed until entry of
8
the judgment of the District Court.
No notice of appeal pursuant to the
9
If the District Judge enters judgment adverse to Petitioner, the
10
District Judge will, at the same time, issue or deny a certificate of
11
appealability.
12
and Recommendation, the parties may file written arguments regarding
13
whether a certificate of appealability should issue.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Within twenty (20) days of the filing of this Report
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?