Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01176/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01176-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 463
Nature of Suit: Habeas Corpus - Alien Detainee
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

VIKTOR NIKOLAYEVICH

OSTAPENKO,

Petitioner,

v.

CRAIG MEYER et al.,

Respondents.

No. 2:14-cv-1176 DAD P

ORDER AND

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A recent court order was served on petitioner’s address of record and returned to the court 

by the postal service as undeliverable. It appears that petitioner has failed to comply with Local 

Rule 182(f), which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any 

address change. More than sixty-three days have passed since the court order was returned by the 

postal service and petitioner has failed to notify the court of a current address. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to 

randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. 

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice 

due to petitioner’s failure to prosecute. See Local Rule 183(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)(l). Within fourteen days 

Case 2:14-cv-01176-KJM-DAD Document 12 Filed 01/06/15 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

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). 

Dated: January 6, 2015 

DAD:9 

osta1176.133a 

Case 2:14-cv-01176-KJM-DAD Document 12 Filed 01/06/15 Page 2 of 2