Johnson v. Wrigley

Full title: CARL T. JOHNSON, Petitioner, v. JEFF WRIGLEY, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Apr 13, 2007

1:06-cv-0822-LJO WMW HC (E.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2007)

Opinion

1:06-cv-0822-LJO WMW HC.

April 13, 2007

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RE MOTION TO DISMISS [ Doc. 8, 9]

LAWRENCE O'NEILL, Magistrate Judge

Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se on a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 2241. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On January 31, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein. These findings and recommendations were served on the parties and contained notice to the parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within thirty days. No objections were filed.¹

1 The court notes that the copy of the findings and recommendations served on Petitioner was returned by the United States Postal Service. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(f), service on a party at their address of record is fully effective.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9^th Cir. 1983). Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Based on the foregoing, it is HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations issued by the Magistrate Judge on January 31, 2007, are a adopted in full; 2. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DISMISSED as moot; 3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment for Respondent and to close this case. IT IS SO ORDERED.