Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Thomas C. Schuster v. Ken Clark

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 22, 2011

THOMAS C. SCHUSTER,
PETITIONER,
v.
KEN CLARK, WARDEN,
RESPONDENT.

ORDER RE: FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 14)

ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE PETITION (DOCS. 10, 1)

ORDER DISMISSING THE PETITION WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND (DOC. 1) ORDER DECLINING TO ISSUE A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY AND DIRECTING THE CLERK TO CLOSE THE CASE

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rules 302 and 304.

On May 31, 2011, the Magistrate Judge filed findings and recommendations to grant Respondent's motion to dismiss without leave to amend Petitioner's first and second due process claims concerning some evidence, to dismiss Petitioner's remaining claims without leave to amend, to decline to issue a certificate of appealability, and to direct the Clerk to close the case.

The findings and recommendations were served on all parties on the same date. The findings and recommendations informed Petitioner that objections were due within thirty days of service.

On June 17, 2011, Petitioner filed timely objections to the findings and recommendations. Although the period for filing a reply has passed, no reply has been filed.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(C), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the case. The undersigned has carefully reviewed the entire file and has considered the objections; the undersigned has determined there is no need to modify the findings and recommendations based on the points raised in the objections. The Court finds that the report and recommendation is supported by the record and proper analysis.

Accordingly, it IS ORDERED that:

1) The findings and recommendations filed on May 31, 2011, are ADOPTED in full;

2) Respondent's motion to dismiss is GRANTED;

3) The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED without leave to amend;

4) The Court DECLINES to issue a certificate of appealability; and

5) The Clerk is DIRECTED to close the action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

0m8i78

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20110722

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.