United States District Court, N.D. California
August 5, 2004.
UWE HELMUT PETERS, Petitioner,
TERESA A. SCHWARTZ, Warden, Respondent.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: MAXINE CHESNEY, District Judge
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH LEAVE TO AMEND; GRANTING APPLICATION TO
PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS
Petitioner is a prisoner who filed this pro se petition for a
writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On April 22, 2004,
the Court dismissed the petition because it did not set forth any
cognizable claims for relief. Petitioner was granted leave to
file an amended petition in this matter within thirty days to
cure the deficiencies in his petition, and the Court cautioned
that failure to do so would "result in the dismissal of this
action." Petitioner has not filed an amended petition.
Accordingly, the case is hereby DISMISSED. See WMX
Technologies v. Miller, 104 F.3d 1133
, 1136 (9th Cir. 1997)
(holding further action by district court necessary where
plaintiff fails to amend after dismissal with leave to amend).
All pending motions are terminated and the Clerk shall close
IT IS SO ORDERED.
JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE
 Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a
trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has
rendered its verdict.
[X] Decision by Court. This action came to trial or hearing
before the Court. The issues have been tried or heard and a
decision has been rendered.
IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.