Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-02345/USCOURTS-azd-4_14-cv-02345-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Benjamin Mendoza,

Petitioner, 

v. 

Louis Winn, 

Respondent.

No. CV-14-02345-TUC-RM (EJM)

REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION 

Petitioner Benjamin Mendoza filed his Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on September 10, 2014. (Doc. 1). On February 23, 2015, 

the Court received notice that an Order mailed to Petitioner was returned as 

undeliverable. (Doc. 9). On March 4, 2015, Respondent filed his Answer to the Petition 

for Writ of Habeas Corpus. (Doc. 11). To date, Petitioner has not filed a Reply, nor has 

Petitioner notified the Court of his present address. A search by the Court of the Federal 

Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator confirms that Petitioner is no longer in BOP custody.

Pursuant to the Court’s Scheduling Order (Doc. 6), failure to comply with the 

Order, including failure to notify the Court of a change of address, may result in 

dismissal of this action without further notice. See Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 

1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with 

an order of the Court). 

 Accordingly, 

Case 4:14-cv-02345-RM Document 14 Filed 09/29/15 Page 1 of 2
- 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 

 The Magistrate Judge hereby RECOMMENDS that the District Court dismiss 

this action for failure to prosecute (LRCiv 41.1), failure to notify the Court of address 

change (LRCiv 83.3), and failure to comply with an Order of the Court (See Ferdik, 963 

F.2d at 1260-61). 

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b), any party may serve and file written objections 

within fourteen days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation. 

A party may respond to another party’s objections within fourteen days after being served 

with a copy thereof. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). No reply to any response shall be filed. See 

id. If objections are not timely filed, then the parties’ rights to de novo review by the 

District Court may be deemed waived. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 

1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc). 

 Dated this 29th day of September, 2015. 

Case 4:14-cv-02345-RM Document 14 Filed 09/29/15 Page 2 of 2