Williams v. Paramo
Filing
34
ORDER signed by District Judge Troy L. Nunley on 01/24/2022 ADOPTING 33 Findings and Recommendations in full; DISMISSING this action without prejudice. The Court DECLINES to issue COA. CASE CLOSED. (Rodriguez, E)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
FRANK JAMES WILLIAMS, JR.,
12
13
14
15
No. 2:13-cv-00417-TLN-KJN
Petitioner,
v.
ORDER
DANIEL PARAMO, Warden,
Respondent.
16
17
Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of habeas
18
corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate
19
Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20
On November 22, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein
21
which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to
22
the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 33.) Neither
23
party filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
24
The court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602
25
F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo.
26
See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). Having reviewed
27
the file, the Court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by
28
the magistrate judge’s analysis.
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed November 22, 2021, (ECF No. 33), are
3
adopted in full;
4
2. This action is dismissed without prejudice. See Local 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); and
5
3. The Court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C.
6
§ 2253.
7
DATED: January 24, 2022
8
9
10
11
Troy L. Nunley
United States District Judge
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
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?