Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01351/USCOURTS-caed-2_15-cv-01351-0/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)

---

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 

KRISTEN LYNN GIBSON, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

D.K. JOHNSON., 

Respondent. 

No. 2:15-cv-1351-JAM-EFB P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 Petitioner is a state prisoner without counsel seeking a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 

28 U.S.C. § 2254. On July 23, 2015, the postal service returned a court order directed to 

petitioner as “undeliverable, RTS – no longer here.” Mail was also returned on August 31, 2015 

and October 13, 2015. 

A party appearing without counsel must keep the court and all parties apprised of his or 

her current address. L.R. 183(b). If mail directed to a petitioner is returned by the postal service 

and petitioner fails to notify the court and opposing parties within 63 days thereafter of his or her 

current address, the court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Id. 

More than 63 days have passed since the postal service initially returned the mail and petitioner 

has not notified the court of her current address. 

///// 

///// 

Case 2:15-cv-01351-JAM-EFB Document 15 Filed 10/20/15 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

 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 41(b); L.R. 110, 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, 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.” Failure to file objections 

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: October 19, 2015. 

Case 2:15-cv-01351-JAM-EFB Document 15 Filed 10/20/15 Page 2 of 2