(HC) Garcia v. Warden, FCI Mendota

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

(HC) Garcia v. Warden, FCI Mendota

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JOSE A. GARCIA, No. 1:23-cv-00833-JLT-SAB (HC) 12 Petitioner, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING 13 v. PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS AS MOOT, TERMINATING 14 WARDEN, FCI MENDOTA, RESPONDENT’S MOTION TO DISMISS, DENYING RESPONDENT’S SUPERSEDING 15 Respondent. MOTION TO DISMISS AS MOOT, AND DIRECTING CLERK OF COURT TO CLOSE 16 CASE 17 (Docs. 11, 13, 21) 18 19 Jose A. Garcia is proceeding pro se with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 20

28 U.S.C. § 2241

. This matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28

21 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 22 On March 26, 2024, the magistrate judge issued Findings and Recommendations to 23 dismiss the petition for writ of habeas corpus as moot, terminate Respondent’s motion to dismiss, 24 and deny Respondent’s superseding motion to dismiss as moot. (Doc. 21.) The Court served the 25 Findings and Recommendations on the parties and notified them that any objections were to be 26 filed within 30 days. (Id. at 3.) The parties were further advised that “failure to file objections 27 within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order.” (Id., citing 28 Wilkerson v. Wheeler,

772 F.3d 834, 839

(9th Cir. 2014).) To date, no objections have been filed, 1 | and the time for doing so has passed. 2 According to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(C), the Court has conducted a de novo review of the 3 | case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes the Findings and 4 | Recommendations are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS: 5 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on March 26, 2024 (Doc. 21) are 6 ADOPTED IN FULL. 7 2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus is DISMISSED as moot. 8 3. Respondent’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 11) is TERMINATED. 9 4. Respondent’s superseding motion to dismiss (Doc. 13) is DENIED as moot. 10 5. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE THE CASE. 11 b IT IS SO ORDERED. 13 | Dated: _May 17, 2024 Cerin | Tower TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Status
Unknown