Opinion
C/A 1:24-750-JD-SVH
03-22-2024
Walberto Sanchez Porto Carrero, Petitioner, v. Office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Respondent.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Shiva V. Hodges, United States Magistrate Judge
Walberto Sanchez Porto Carrero (“Petitioner”), proceeding pro se, filed this petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in the District of Columbia. [ECF No. 1]. The matter was transferred to this court on February 13, 2024. [ECF Nos. 4, 5]. On February 21, 2024, the undersigned issued orders granting Petitioner's request to proceed in forma pauperis and directing Petitioner to keep the court apprised of his address. [ECF Nos. 8, 9].
On March 18, 2024, the court's order noting the transferred was returned in the mail to the Clerk of Court. The envelope states:
NO LONGER @ FCI WILLIAMSBURG
GONE OVER 30 DAYS
CANNOT IDENTIFY (NAME & NUMBER
NO INDIVIDUAL W/ NAME[ECF No. 11-1]. Petitioner has failed to keep the court apprised of his address, and as a result, neither the court nor the Respondent has any means of contacting him concerning his case. As such, it appears to the court that he wishes to abandon this action.
Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that this action be dismissed with prejudice, in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). The Clerk is directed to send this Report and Recommendation to Petitioner at his last known address. If Petitioner notifies the court within the time set for filing objections to this Report and Recommendation that he wishes to continue with this case and provides a current address, the Clerk is directed to vacate this Report and Recommendation and return this file to the undersigned for further handling. If, however, no objections are filed, the Clerk shall forward this Report and Recommendation to the district judge for disposition.
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.
The parties are directed to note the important information in the attached “Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation.”
Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation
The parties are advised that they may file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation with the District Judge. Objections must specifically identify the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made and the basis for such objections. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note).
Specific written objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); see Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a), (d). Filing by mail pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 may be accomplished by mailing objections to:
Robin L. Blume, Clerk
United States District Court
901 Richland Street
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Failure to timely file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation will result in waiver of the right to appeal from a judgment of the District Court based upon such Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).