(HC) Summers v. Trimbal

• Court: District Court, E.D. California
• Decided: July 7, 2025
• Docket: 2:11-cv-02584
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GREGORY SUMMERS, No. 2:11-cv-2584 TLN AC 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER 14 TRIMBAL, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 Petitioner Gregory Summers (“Plaintiff”), a former state prisoner proceeding with 18 counsel, filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. The matter 19 was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 20 Rule 302. 21 On May 2, 2025, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which 22 were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to the 23 findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 70.) Neither 24 party filed objections to the findings and recommendations. 25 The Court presumes that any findings of fact are correct. See Orand v. United States, 602 26 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1979). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. 27 See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983). The Court has 28 reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and 1 by the magistrate judge’s analysis. 2 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 3 1. The findings and recommendations (ECF No. 70) are ADOPTED; and 4 2. Petitioner’s motion to dismiss the pending habeas corpus action (ECF No. 68) is 5 construed as a request for voluntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of 6 Civil Procedure. So construed, this action is voluntarily dismissed, and the case is closed. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 DATED: July 2, 2025 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28