Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-02245/USCOURTS-caed-2_24-cv-02245-0/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 

ANTONIO CRUZ CARDENAS, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

A. MAYORKAS, et al., 

Respondents. 

No. 2:24-cv-2245 AC P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 Documents from the court were recently served on petitioner’s address of record and 

returned by the postal service. 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 shall randomly 

assign a United States District Judge to this action. 

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice for 

failure to prosecute. See L.R. 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 

after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 

Case 2:24-cv-02245-TLN-AC Document 4 Filed 01/06/25 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 

objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 

Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is 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, 2025 

Case 2:24-cv-02245-TLN-AC Document 4 Filed 01/06/25 Page 2 of 2