Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Omar Farouk Gani v. Randy Grounds

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION


April 30, 2011

OMAR FAROUK GANI, PETITIONER,
v.
RANDY GROUNDS, WARDEN, RESPONDENT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Andrew J. Guilford United States District Judge

ORDER AND JUDGMENT DISMISSING ACTION FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION

On February 18, 2011, petitioner, then a prisoner at Soledad State Prison, filed a Petition for Writ Habeas Corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 by a Person in State Custody.

On February 23, 2011, the Court issued an Order re Petitioner's Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and an Order Requiring Return to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. The service copies of these orders sent to petitioner have since been returned to the Court as "Return to Sender. Paroled."

On March 18, 2011, having received no communication from petitioner, the Court ordered petitioner to show cause in writing no later than April 4, 2011 why the action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Petitioner did not respond to the order to show cause. The service copy of this order has since been returned to the Court as "Paroled."

Pursuant to Local Rule 41-6:

A party proceeding pro se shall keep the Court and opposing parties apprised of such party's current address and telephone number, if any. If mail directed by the Clerk to a pro se petitioner's address of record is returned undelivered by the Postal Service, and if, within fifteen (15) days of the service date, such petitioner fails to notify, in writing, the Court and opposing parties of said petitioner's current address, the Court may dismiss the action with or without prejudice for want of prosecution.

Local Rule 41-6; see Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988).

To date, petitioner has not notified the Court of his new address and, as a result, the Court has no way of communicating with petitioner. Moreover, petitioner has ignored this Court's order to show cause and has not made any contact with the Court. Accordingly, this action is ORDERED DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

LET JUDGMENT BE ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

Presented by:

/S/ FREDERICK F. MUMM

FREDERICK F. MUMM United States Magistrate Judge

20110430

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.