From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mulholland v. Thompson

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 20, 2021
2:21-CV-0374-WBS-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2021)

Opinion

2:21-CV-0374-WBS-DMC-P

12-20-2021

GREGORY MULHOLLAND, Petitioner, v. PAUL THOMPSON, Respondent.


ORDER

WILLIAM B.SHUBB UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Petitioner, who is proceeding pro se, brings this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Eastern District of California local rules.

On August 27, 2021, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that the parties may file objections within the time specified therein. On September 24, 2021, the court gave petitioner a thirty-day extension of time to file his objections. No. objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed.

The Court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and the Magistrate Judge's analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed August 27, 2021, are adopted in full;
2. Respondent's motion to dismiss, ECF No. 10, is granted;
3. Petitioner's motion for injunctive relief, ECF No. 3, is denied; and
4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file.


Summaries of

Mulholland v. Thompson

United States District Court, Eastern District of California
Dec 20, 2021
2:21-CV-0374-WBS-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2021)
Case details for

Mulholland v. Thompson

Case Details

Full title:GREGORY MULHOLLAND, Petitioner, v. PAUL THOMPSON, Respondent.

Court:United States District Court, Eastern District of California

Date published: Dec 20, 2021

Citations

2:21-CV-0374-WBS-DMC-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 20, 2021)