Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-02211/USCOURTS-caed-2_02-cv-02211-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

RAYMOND P. IDLEMAN, 

Petitioner, No. CIV S-02-2211 FCD GGH P

vs.

TOM L. CAREY, Warden, et al., ORDER &

Respondents. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

On June 14, 2006, July 28, 2006 and August 30, 2006, court orders were served

on petitioner’s address of record and returned by the postal service. It appears that petitioner has

failed to comply with Local Rule 83-182(f), which requires that a party appearing in propria

persona inform the court of any address change. Based on petitioner’s failure to keep the court

apprised of his current address, respondent is relieved of the obligation to file a response to the

second amended petition at this time.

IT IS ORDERED that respondent need not file a response to the second amended

petition pending further order by this court.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for

petitioner's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 83-182(f)

and 11-110 (E.D. Cal. 1997).

Case 2:02-cv-02211-FCD-GGH Document 31 Filed 10/16/06 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

2

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 twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten 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: 10/16/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009/bb

idle2211.133a

 

Case 2:02-cv-02211-FCD-GGH Document 31 Filed 10/16/06 Page 2 of 2