(HC) Iniguez v. Thompson
Filing
30
ORDER signed by Senior Judge William B. Shubb on 11/18/2020 ADOPTING in full 19 Findings and Recommendations. Respondent's 9 motion to dismiss is GRANTED and the case DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. The Court DECLINES to issue the certificate of appealability. CASE CLOSED (Kastilahn, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
CRUZ INIGUEZ,
12
No. 2:19-cv-1318 WBS JDP P
Petitioner,
13
v.
ORDER
14
PAUL THOMPSON, Warden,
15
Respondent.
16
Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this application for a writ of
17
18
habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The matter was referred to a United States
19
Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20
On September 1, 2020, 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. Petitioner has filed
23
objections to the findings and recommendations.
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this
24
25
court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the
26
court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper
27
analysis.
28
/////
1
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed September 1, 2020, are adopted in full;
3
2. Respondent’s January 9, 2020, motion to dismiss (ECF No. 9) is granted and the case
4
dismissed for lack of jurisdiction; and
5
3. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. §
6
2253.
7
Dated: November 18, 2020
8
9
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?