(HC) Conners v. Pfeiffer

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ENOCH CONNERS, No. 2:19-cv-0638 KJM DB P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PFEIFFER, 15 Respondent.

17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. By order dated July 31, 2019, the court screened and dismissed the original petition. (ECF No. 12.) Petitioner was granted thirty days leave to file an amended petition. Thereafter, no amended petition was filed on the docket and the court recommended that this action be dismissed. (ECF No. 13.)

22 Petitioner then filed objections stating that he was unable to respond to the court’s order because he was transferred on October 17, 2019. (ECF No. 14.) Petitioner also requested additional time to file an amended petition. The court vacated the findings and recommendations and granted petitioner thirty days leave to file an amended petition. (ECF No. 15.) Those thirty days have passed, and petitioner has not filed an amended petition, requested additional time to file an amended petition, updated his address, or otherwise responded to the court’s orders.

28 //// 1 Accordingly, the court will recommend that this action be dismissed for failure to || prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. See E.D. Cal. R. 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

3 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed.

4 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)(1). Within fourteen days || after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner 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.” 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).

11 | Dated: February 18, 2020 14 BORAH BARNES 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE | piB:12 DLB:1/Orders/Prisoner/Habeas/conn0638.f&r.dism