IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 23, 2012
JOSH C. HUGGINS, PLAINTIFF,
SOLANO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
By amended order filed February 22, 2012 (docket # 8), plaintiff/petitioner was ordered to file an in forma pauperis affidavit or to pay the appropriate filing fee and to file a habeas corpus petition within twenty-eight days, his complaint having been dismissed for the reasons set forth in the court's February 15, 2012 order (docket # 7); he was also cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation of dismissal of this action. The twenty-eight day period has now expired, and plaintiff/petitioner has not responded to the court's order and has not either filed an in forma pauperis affidavit or paid the appropriate filing fee, nor has he filed a habeas petition.
Although it appears from the file that plaintiff's/petitioner's copy of the order was returned, plaintiff/petitioner was properly served. It is the plaintiff's/petitioner's responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff/petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.