From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hooks v. Ruffcorn

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 28, 2005
No. 2:05-cv-1763-MCE-DAD-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 28, 2005)

Opinion

No. 2:05-cv-1763-MCE-DAD-P.

December 28, 2005


ORDER


Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has 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 General Order No. 262.

On November 7, 2005, the magistrate judge filed Findings and Recommendations herein which were served on Plaintiff and which contained notice to Plaintiff that any Objections to the Findings and Recommendations were to be filed within twenty (20) days. Plaintiff has not filed Objections to the Findings and Recommendations.

Although it appears from the file that Plaintiff'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 November 7, 2005, are adopted in full; and

2. This action is dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a cognizable claim.


Summaries of

Hooks v. Ruffcorn

United States District Court, E.D. California
Dec 28, 2005
No. 2:05-cv-1763-MCE-DAD-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 28, 2005)
Case details for

Hooks v. Ruffcorn

Case Details

Full title:DAVID HOOKS, Plaintiff, v. MAX RUFFCORN, Defendant

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

Date published: Dec 28, 2005

Citations

No. 2:05-cv-1763-MCE-DAD-P (E.D. Cal. Dec. 28, 2005)