Ngo v. Seibel

Filing 10

ORDER, FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 11/29/2017 ORDERING the Clerk to randomly assign a US District Judge to this action and RECOMMENDING petitioner's 1 application for writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Assigned and referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R 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 KY NGO, 12 13 14 15 No. 2:17-cv-1815 AC P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS K. SEIBEL, Respondent. 16 17 18 19 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order filed September 5, 2017, petitioner was ordered to show cause why the petition 20 should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. ECF No. 7. He was warned that failure to 21 comply with the order would result in dismissal of the petition. Id. On October 13, 2017, the 22 court granted petitioner’s request for an extension of time to file his response. ECF No. 9. The 23 time for responding to the order to show cause has now passed and petitioner has neither 24 responded to the order nor sought an additional extension of his deadline. 25 26 27 28 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 1 1 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 3 after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 4 objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 5 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that 6 failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District 7 Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 DATED: November 29, 2017 10 11 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?