From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chestang v. Swarthout

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 2, 2012
No. 2:12-cv-0737 GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 2, 2012)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-0737 GGH P

07-02-2012

DANIEL K. CHESTANG, Petitioner, v. SWARTHOUT, Respondent.


ORDER

Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. This case is before the undersigned pursuant to petitioner's consent. Doc. 4. On April 23, 2012, the petition was dismissed with leave to amend within 28 days, as the petition failed to set forth a cognizable claim. However, that time limit has passed and petitioner has not filed an amended petition or otherwise communicated with the court.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed for the reasons set forth in the April 23, 2012, order and for failure to follow court instructions to file an amended petition. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

Gregory G. Hollows

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Chestang v. Swarthout

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jul 2, 2012
No. 2:12-cv-0737 GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 2, 2012)
Case details for

Chestang v. Swarthout

Case Details

Full title:DANIEL K. CHESTANG, Petitioner, v. SWARTHOUT, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jul 2, 2012

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-0737 GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 2, 2012)