Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-03253/USCOURTS-cand-5_04-cv-03253-0/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)

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Order of Dismissal

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\HC.04\Tang03253_dismiss3-11.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KHOA TAN TANG,

Petitioner,

 vs.

DERRAL ADAMS, Warden

Respondent.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 04-03253 JW (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Petitioner filed the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. §

2254 on August 11, 2004. On April 6, 2007, the Court issued an order directing

respondent to show cause why the writ should not be granted based on the cognizable

claims in the petition. On April 23, 2007, the copy of the order sent to petitioner was

returned as undeliverable. Subsequent orders have also been returned as undeliverable,

e.g., the Court’s “Order Re Electronic Filing in Cases with Unrepresented Parties” was

returned on June 4, 2007, and an order granting respondent an extension of time to file an

answer was returned on June 20, 2007.

Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 3-11, a party proceeding pro se whose

Case 5:04-cv-03253-JW Document 20 Filed 09/06/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Order of Dismissal

P:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\HC.04\Tang03253_dismiss3-11.wpd 2

address changes while an action is pending must promptly file and serve upon all opposing

parties a notice of change of address specifying the new address. See L.R. 3- 11(a ). The

Court may, without prejudice, dismiss a complaint or strike an answer when: (1) mail

directed to the attorney or the pro se party by the court has been returned to the court as not

deliverable, and (2) the court fails to receive within sixty days of this return a written

communication from the attorney or pro se party indicating a current address. See L.R.

3-11(b). 

It has now been more than sixty days since the Court’s initial order to show cause

was returned as undeliverable. The Court has not received a notice from petitioner of a

new address. Accordingly, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ.

P. 41(b); L.R. 3-11(b).

DATED: 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge 

Case 5:04-cv-03253-JW Document 20 Filed 09/06/07 Page 2 of 2