1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ANTONIO ALONSO MORALES, No. 2:23-cv-00761-DAD-CKD (HC) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER ADOPTING FIDNINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISMISSING 14 WARDEN, THIS ACTION 15 Respondent. (Doc. Nos. 5, 10, 12) 16 17 Petitioner Antonio Alonso Morales is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition 18 for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to

. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On January 23, 2024, the assigned magistrate judge issued findings and recommendations 21 recommending that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, due to petitioner’s failure to 22 prosecute this action and failure to obey a court order. (Doc. No. 12.) Specifically, in an order 23 issued on December 7, 2023, petitioner was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non- 24 opposition to respondent’s pending motion to dismiss within thirty days, and petitioner did not do 25 so. The pending findings and recommendations were served upon the parties and contained 26 notice that any objections thereto were to be filed within fourteen (14) days after service. (Id. at 27 1.) The service copy of the findings and recommendations, which was mailed to petitioner at his 28 address of record, was returned to the court as “Undeliverable, Return to Sender, No Longer 1 | Here.”! To date, no objections to the pending findings and recommendations have been filed and 2 | the time in which to do so has passed. 3 In accordance with the provisions of

(b)(1)(C), the court has conducted a 4 | de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the court concludes that the 5 | pending findings and recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. 6 Accordingly, 7 1. The findings and recommendations issued on January 23, 2024 (Doc. No. 12) are 8 adopted in full; 9 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus (Doc. No. 1) is dismissed, without 10 prejudice;” 11 3, The findings and recommendations issued on August 8, 2023 (Doc. No. 5) have 12 been rendered moot by this order; 13 4. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 10) is denied as having been rendered 14 moot by this order; and 15 5. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case. 16 IT IS SO ORDERED. 'T| Dated: _ April 2, 2024 □□□ A. 2, ye 18 DALE A. DROZD 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20 21 22 23 24 | —___ 95 ' The court notes that according to the U.S. Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator, petitioner was released from BOP custody on December 19, 2023. | a Because petitioner is a federal prisoner bringing a § 2241 petition, a certificate of appealability 27 || is not required. See Harrison v. Ollison,

(9th Cir. 2008) (“The plain language of [28 U.S.C.] § 2253(c)(1) does not require a petitioner to obtain a COA in order to appeal the 28 | denial of a § 2241 petition.”).