(HC) LaFlamme v. Lynch ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DON LAFLAMME, No. 2:21-cv-00756-JAM-JDP (HC) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 JEFF LYNCH, 15 Respondent. 16 17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed an application for a writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate 19 Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302. 20 On December 28, 2021, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on petitioner and which contained notice to petitioner that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. No objections were 23 filed.1 24 1 Petitioner did, however, file a motion for a temporary restraining order. ECF No. 15. 25 That motion is denied because petitioner has not demonstrated a likelihood of success on the 26 merits. See Winter v. NRDC, Inc., 555 U.S. 7, 20 (2008). Petitioner was previously notified that his petition failed to state a claim, and he was granted sixty days to file an amended petition. ECF 27 No. 12. After he failed to do so, he was ordered to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to state a claim. ECF No. 13. Petitioner did not 28 respond to that order, and on December 28, 2021, the magistrate recommended that this action be 1 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 2 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 3 ORDERED that: 4 1. The findings and recommendations filed December 28, 2021, are adopted in full; 5 2. This action is dismissed for failure to prosecute, failure to comply with court orders, 6 and for failure to state a claim for the reasons set forth in the court’s June 3, 2021 order. See ECF 7 No. 12; 8 3. Petitioner’s motion for a temporary restraining order, ECF No. 15, is denied; 9 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case; and 10 5. The court declines to issue the certificate of appealability referenced in 28 U.S.C. § 11 2253. 12 13 DATED: February 8, 2022 /s/ John A. Mendez 14 THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 dismissed. Petitioner’s motion for a temporary restraining order is not responsive to magistrate 28 judge’s findings and recommendations or to any order issued in this action.