Opinion
2:22-cv-01159-TLN-EFB
10-31-2022
MICHAEL LITTLETON, Petitioner, v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY, Respondent.
ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Petitioner is a county jail inmate proceeding pro se. This action was opened when he filed a state court form for a petition for writ of habeas corpus. (ECF No. 1.) The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.
On September 26, 2022, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein which were served on Petitioner and which contained notice to Petitioner that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. (ECF No. 14.) Petitioner has not filed objections to the findings and recommendations.
Error! Main Document Only. Although it appears from the file that Petitioner's copy of the findings and recommendations was returned, 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.
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 September 26, 2022 (ECF No. 14) are ADOPTED in full;
2. This action is DISMISSED.