Warden
(HC) Rosas v. Warden
Opinion
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 MARIO ROSAS, No. 2:23-cv-0616 DB P Petitioner, v. ORDER AND WARDEN, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Respondent. 16 Petitioner, a federal prisoner proceeding pro se, filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Petitioner has not, however, filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the required filing fee ($5.00) in this case. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1914(a); 1915(a). Even though petitioner has not paid the filing fee, the undersigned will recommend the petition be dismissed as duplicative. Examination of this action and the court’s records reveals that the petitioner is already proceeding with an exact copy of the same petition for relief in another action filed on the same day as this action. See Mario Rosas v. Warden, No. 2:23-cv-0617-WBS-AC (E.D. Cal.). In that action, petitioner paid the filing fee. In that action, by order and findings and recommendations 26 …