(HC)Wood v. Lackner, No. 1:2015cv00945 - Document 17 (E.D. Cal. 2018)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS that the Court Dismiss the 1 Case for Failure to Prosecute signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 06/05/2018. Referred to Judge Drozd; Objections to F&R due by 7/9/2018. (Flores, E)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROBERT WOOD, No. 1:15-cv-00945-DAD-SKO HC 12 Petitioner, 13 v. 14 HEIDI LACKNER, CDCR SCC Warden, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COURT DISMISS THE CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 15 Respondent. (Doc. 1) 16 17 Petitioner, Robert Wood, is a federal prisoner proceeding with a petition for writ of habeas 18 corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On March 7, 2018, the copy of the Court’s Findings and 19 Recommendations mailed to Petitioner was returned to the Clerk marked "Undeliverable, Inmate 20 Discharged." 21 22 23 24 25 26 Local Rule 183 provides: A party appearing in propria persona shall keep the Court and opposing parties advised as to his or her current address. If mail directed to a plaintiff in propria persona by the Clerk is returned by the U.S. Postal Service, and if such Plaintiff fails to notify the Court and opposing parties within sixtythree (63) days thereafter of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. 27 Although more than sixty-three (63) days have elapsed from the date of the return of the 28 order mailed to Petitioner, Petitioner has failed to advise the Court of his current address or to 1 1 contact the Court in any other way. The Court has discretion to impose any and all sanctions 2 authorized by statute or rule or within the inherent power of the Court, including dismissing the 3 motion, based on a petitioner’s failure to comply with a court rule. F.R.Civ.P. 11; Local R. 110. 4 Conclusion and Recommendation 5 Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that as a result of Petitioner’s failure to 6 7 prosecute the case, the Court dismiss with prejudice the motion for reconsideration in the above- 8 captioned action. 9 These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 10 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C ' 636(b)(1). Within thirty 11 (30) days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, Petitioner may file 12 13 14 written objections with the Court. The document should be captioned AObjections to Magistrate Judge=s Findings and Recommendations.@ Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections 15 within the specified time may constitute waiver of the right to appeal the District Court's order. 16 Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 ((9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 17 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)). 18 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 21 Dated: June 5, 2018 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 .
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
