From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Webster v. Stanton

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 9, 2008
No. CIV S-07-2282 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 9, 2008)

Opinion

No. CIV S-07-2282 MCE KJM P.

April 9, 2008


ORDER


Plaintiffs filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72-302.

On February 4, 2008, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on plaintiffs and which contained notice to plaintiffs that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. No objections to the findings and recommendations have been filed.

Although it appears from the file that plaintiff Webster's copy of the findings and recommendations was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed February 4, 2008, are adopted in full; and
2. This action is dismissed as frivolous.


Summaries of

Webster v. Stanton

United States District Court, E.D. California
Apr 9, 2008
No. CIV S-07-2282 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 9, 2008)
Case details for

Webster v. Stanton

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL WEBSTER RACARDO JACKSON, Plaintiffs, v. GARY R. STANTON, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Apr 9, 2008

Citations

No. CIV S-07-2282 MCE KJM P (E.D. Cal. Apr. 9, 2008)

Citing Cases

Villasana v. Pittman

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court's finding that, because there is no constitutional right for…