Warden

Alba Anette Dukes v. Warden

Good Law
United States District Court, Central District of CaliforniaMarch 4, 20245:23-cv-01789California213 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ALBA DUKES, Case No. 5:23-cv-01789-JWH (SK)

12 Petitioner

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT

13 v. AND RECOMMENDATION TO

GRANT MOTION TO DISMISS

14 ELISEO RICOLCOL, Warden,

15 Respondent.

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1 Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the filed Report and Recommendation to dismiss the petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 and any relevant records if needed. Because the time for objections has passed with none 4|| filed, the Court need not review de novo the findings and conclusions in the 5|| Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 154 (1985); 6|| United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). 7 Therefore, the Court hereby ORDERS as follows: 8 1. The petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED for all the 9|| reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation. 10 2. Judgment shall issue accordingly, DISMISSING this action 11|| without prejudice. 12 …

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.