IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 26, 2012
AUSTIN VERLAND RAY, JR., PETITIONER,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RESPONDENT.
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Petitioner proceeds without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On January 10, 2012, the court dismissed the original petition with leave to amend. The dismissal order explained the petition's deficiencies, gave petitioner 30 days to file an amended petition, and warned petitioner that failure to file an amended petition could result in dismissal.
The 30-day period has expired and petitioner has not filed an amended petition or otherwise responded to the court's order.*fn1
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case.
Further, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed.
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, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). In his objections petitioner may address whether a certificate of appealability should issue in the event he files an appeal of the judgment in this case. See Rule 11, Federal Rules Governing Section 2254 Cases (the district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant).