(HC) Tran v. Thompson
Filing
14
ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 01/17/2023 ADOPTING 13 Findings and Recommendations in full; GRANTING 9 Respondent's Motion to Dismiss; DISMISSING 1 The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus without prejudice. CASE CLOSED. (Rodriguez, E)
Case 2:21-cv-01707-KJM-DB Document 14 Filed 01/17/23 Page 1 of 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
DOUGLAS TRAN,
12
Petitioner,
13
14
No. 2:21-cv-01707 KJM DB P
v.
ORDER
PAUL THOMPSON,
15
Respondent.
16
17
Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of habeas
18
corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as
19
provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
20
On July 11, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations, which were
21
served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings
22
and recommendations were to be filed within 30 days. Neither party has filed objections to the
23
findings and recommendations.
24
In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this
25
court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having reviewed the file, the court finds the
26
findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the proper analysis.
27
/////
28
/////
1
Case 2:21-cv-01707-KJM-DB Document 14 Filed 01/17/23 Page 2 of 2
1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
2
1. The findings and recommendations filed July 11, 2022 (ECF No. 13) are adopted in
3
full;
4
2. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (ECF No. 9) is GRANTED;
5
3. The petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED without
6
7
8
prejudice; and
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
DATED: January 17, 2023.
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?