Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00976/USCOURTS-caed-1_07-cv-00976-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act

---

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 United States Postal Service returned the order served on plaintiff on September 20, 2007, as 1

undeliverable. A notation on the envelope indicated: Return to Sender - Not in Custody. However, plaintiff has not

notified the court of any change in his address. Absent such notice, service at a party’s prior address is fully

effective. See Local Rule 83-182(f). 

1

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

ROBERTO COTA ROBLES,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CHARLES DeROSA, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

1:07-cv-00976-OWW-DLB-P

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATION (Doc. 6)

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION

Plaintiff, Roberto Cota Robles (“plaintiff”), is a state

prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local

Rule 72-302.

On September 10, 2007, the Magistrate Judge filed Findings

and a Recommendation herein which were served on plaintiff and

which contained notice to plaintiff that any objections to the

Findings and Recommendation were to be filed within thirty (30)

days. To date, plaintiff has not filed objections thereto.1

Case 1:07-cv-00976-OWW -DLB Document 8 Filed 01/02/08 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

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 73-305, this Court has conducted a

de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the

entire file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendation to

be supported by the record and by proper analysis.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendation, filed September 10,

2007, are ADOPTED in full; and,

2. This action is DISMISSED based on plaintiff’s failure

to obey the court’s order of July 23, 2007.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 2, 2008 /s/ Oliver W. Wanger 

emm0d6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:07-cv-00976-OWW -DLB Document 8 Filed 01/02/08 Page 2 of 2