Opinion
No. 2:19-cv-02290 JAM GGH P
05-18-2020
RALPH D. MORELAND, Petitioner, v. UNKNOWN, Respondent.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se. The matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302(c).
On November 12, 2019, petitioner filed a motion for extension of time to file his writ of habeas corpus. ECF No. 1. On December 9, 2019, the court denied the motion for extension of time and granted petitioner thirty days from the date of the order to file an in forma pauperis affidavit or pay the required filing fee, and file a petition for writ of habeas corpus in order to properly commence his federal habeas action. ECF No. 3. Petitioner was warned that failure to comply with the court's order and deadlines would result in a recommendation that this matter be dismissed. Id. at 3. Petitioner did not respond. On January 30, 2020, the undersigned issued Findings and Recommendations recommending dismissal due to petitioner's failure to respond to court orders or take any action to prosecute this case. ECF No. 5. On March 3, 2020, petitioner filed late objections. ECF No. 6. Petitioner, however, did not file his federal habeas petition to properly commence this action and an application to proceed in forma pauperis, or pay the required filing fee, as instructed by this court on December 9, 2019. Nevertheless, the court afforded petitioner one more opportunity to properly file a federal habeas petition and an application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the required fee in accordance with the court's December 9, 2019 order. ECF No. 7. Petitioner was further warned that failure to comply with the court's deadlines and orders would risk the undersigned issuing findings and recommendations recommending that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or to follow a court order pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(b). Id. at 2. Petitioner has not responded to the court's orders, nor taken any action to prosecute this case.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court's order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.
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, petitioner may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Petitioner is 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). Dated: May 18, 2020
/s/ Gregory G. Hollows
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE