1
2
3
4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
5 AT TACOMA
6
NEIL JAMES ROBERSON,
Case No. 2:24-cv-01130-JCC-TLF
7 Petitioner,
v. REPORT AND
8 RECOMMENDATION
VERGE,
9 Noted for: November 15, 2024
Respondent.
10
11 This matter is before the Court on petitioner’s failure to respond to the Court’s
12 order to show cause (“Order”). Dkt. 8. Petitioner is proceeding pro se and in forma
13 pauperis in this matter, which has been referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge.
14 Mathews, Sec’y of H.E.W. v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B);
15 Local Rule MJR 4(a).
16 On July 25, 2024, petitioner filed a proposed habeas corpus petition pursuant to
17 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Dkt. 1. On August 6, 2024 he filed a motion for leave to proceed in
18 forma pauperis (“IFP”). Dkt. 4. Given the identified deficiencies in the proposed petition,
19 namely that exhaustion of state remedies had not been shown, the Court did not grant
20 petitioner’s IFP application. Dkt. 8; See Dkt. 4-14 at 1-8. Petitioner was given until
21 October 18, 2024 to show cause why his petition should not be dismissed. Id.
22 Petitioner has not filed a response to the Order. Therefore, the Court
23 recommends dismissal of this action without prejudice. Picard v. Connor, 404 U.S. 270,
24
1 276 (1971) (if a petition for habeas corpus contains claims that are unexhausted, it is
2 not cognizable in federal court); Cf. Casey v. Moore, 386 F.3d 896, 920 n. 26, 921 n.27
3 (9th Cir. 2004) (unexhausted claim may be dismissed if the state courts procedurally
4 barred the claim).
5 The parties have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report and
6 Recommendation to file written objections thereto. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ.
7 P. 72(b); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 6. Failure to file objections will result in a waiver of
8 those objections for purposes of appeal. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985).
9 Accommodating the time limit imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Clerk is directed set
10 this matter for consideration on November 15, 2024, as noted in the caption.
11
12
13
Dated this 31st day of October, 2024.
14
15
16 A
Theresa L. Fricke
17
United States Magistrate Judge
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Not legal advice. These patterns come from public court records, not ratings of judges as people. They may reflect the types of cases a judge handles, local procedures or other factors, and they do not account for the facts of any individual case. Past patterns do not predict future rulings. Records can be incomplete, months behind current activity, or matched to the wrong person; sealed and confidential cases are not included. Use this as one piece of information, never the sole basis for legal strategy or a recusal motion. Full disclaimer: https://judgefinder.io/legal/disclaimer Read the full disclaimer.