UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 11, 2011
DANIEL MILLAN, PETITIONER,
MARTIN D. BITER, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: John F. Walter United States District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 636, the Court has reviewed the Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus, the records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Petitioner has filed Objections to the Report and Recommendation, and the Court has engaged in a de novo review of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which Petitioner has objected. The Court accepts the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge.
Petitioner also has filed a "Notice and Motion for Withdrawal Stay and Abeyance of District Court Judgment With Leave to Exhaust Related Claims and File Amended Habeas Corpus" ("Motion to Stay"), in which he seeks a stay of these proceedings so that he can exhaust claims that have never been raised in this or any other court. The Motion to Stay is denied because: (1) Petitioner has not shown good cause for failing to bring these unexhausted claims earlier; (2) there is no indication that the unexhausted claims are potentially meritorious as federal claims; and (3) the filing of the Motion to Stay after the Report and Recommendation was issued and on the eve of the entry of judgment appears to be an intentionally dilatory litigation tactic. See Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269, 277 (2005).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) the Motion for Stay is denied; (2) the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is denied; and (3) Judgment shall be entered dismissing this action with prejudice.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.