From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Bower

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 23, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-02810 TLN DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2013)

Opinion

No. 2:12-cv-02810 TLN DAD P

2013-09-23

LONNIE WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. D. BOWER, et al., Respondents.


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

On August 12, 2013, petitioner was ordered to file an amended petition for a writ of habeas corpus and an affidavit in support of his request to proceed in forma pauperis or the appropriate filing fee within thirty days from the date of the order. Thirty days from that date have now passed, and petitioner has not filed an amended petition or in forma pauperis, submitted the appropriate filing fee, or otherwise responded to the court's order.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

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)(l). 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).

_______________

DALE A. DROZD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Williams v. Bower

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 23, 2013
No. 2:12-cv-02810 TLN DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2013)
Case details for

Williams v. Bower

Case Details

Full title:LONNIE WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. D. BOWER, et al., Respondents.

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

Date published: Sep 23, 2013

Citations

No. 2:12-cv-02810 TLN DAD P (E.D. Cal. Sep. 23, 2013)