(HC) Rutkowski v. California Dept. of Corrections et al, No. 2:2007cv00979 - Document 7 (E.D. Cal. 2008)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge John F. Moulds on 2/6/2008 recommending that this action be dismissed for petitioner's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address re 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Skippy Charles Rutkowski Objections to F&R due w/in 20 days.(Matson, R)

Download PDF
(HC) Rutkowski v. California Dept. of Corrections et al Doc. 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 SKIPPY CHARLES RUTKOWSKI, 11 12 Petitioner, No. CIV S-07-0979 LKK JFM P vs. 13 14 15 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et al., Respondents. 16 17 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / A recent court order was served on petitioner’s address of record and returned by 18 the postal service. It appears that petitioner has failed to comply with Local Rule 83-182(f), 19 which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change. 20 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for 21 petitioner's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 83-182(f) 22 and 11-110 (E.D. Cal. 1997). 23 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 24 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty 25 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 26 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the 2 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 3 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 4 DATED: February 6, 2008. 5 6 7 8 9 /001 rutk2173.133a 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.