Fikes

(HC) Fiorito v. Fikes

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaApril 16, 20242:22-cv-02269California363 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL FIORITO, No. 2:22-cv-2269 WBS AC P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 FIKES, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se with a habeas corpus petition filed 18 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. On February 7, 2024, respondent filed a motion to dismiss the 19 petition. ECF No. 21. On March 18, 2024, petitioner was ordered to file and serve, within 20 twenty-one days, an opposition or statement of non-opposition to the pending motion. ECF No. 21 22. In the same order, petitioner was informed that failure to file an opposition would result in a 22 recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant 23 to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Id. The twenty-one-day period has now expired, and 24 petitioner has not filed a response to the motion or otherwise responded to the court’s order. 25 For the foregoing reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that…

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.