Opinion
2:92-cr-0205 WBS AC
10-13-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. AARON E. PRATT, Defendant/Petitioner.
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
ALLISON CLAIRE, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding through counsel, filed a petition for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2241. ECF No. 74. That motion, along with an identical motion filed in United States v. Pratt, No. 2:01-cr-0152 WBS AC, was referred to the undersigned. ECF No. 76. Findings and recommendations were filed in case 2:01-cr-0152, recommending that the petition be denied. See 2:01-cr-0152, ECF No. 74. Due to an administrative oversight, the findings and recommendations were not also filed in this case, as was intended. Accordingly, the July 18, 2019 findings and recommendations filed in United States v. Pratt, No. 2:01-cr-0152 WBS AC at ECF No. 74 are adopted herein by reference and it is recommended that the § 2241 petition in this case also be denied.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that petitioner's application for a writ of habeas corpus be dismissed for the same reasons set forth in the July 18, 2019 findings and recommendations filed in United States v. Pratt, No. 2:01-cr-0152 WBS AC at ECF No. 74, which are incorporated herein by reference.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).