Opinion
2:22-cv-01307 WBS DB P
04-12-2023
JOEL LADON LEWIS, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Respondents.
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
DEBORAH BARNES, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
By order filed January 19, 2023, petitioner's habeas application was dismissed and thirty days' leave to file an amended petition was granted. That time period has expired, and petitioner has not responded to the court's order. Although petitioner's copy of the order was returned by the U.S. Postal Service on February 2, 2023, petitioner was properly served.
It is 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. If mail directed to a person proceeding in propria persona by the Clerk is returned by the U.S. Postal Service, and if such party fails to notify the Court and opposing parties within sixty-three (63) days thereafter of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Local Rule 183(b).
Petitioner has failed to respond to the court's order filed January 19, 2023. It also appears that petitioner has failed to comply with the local rules requiring a party appearing in propria persona to inform the court of any address change.
For these reasons, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for without prejudice. See Local Rule 110; Local Rule 183(b); Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).
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)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are 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).