(HC)Jones v. Board of Prison Terms, No. 2:2007cv02173 - Document 10 (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 court apprised of his current address. 1 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus filed by Kenneth Jones Motion referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. Objections may be filed w/i 20 days after service of these findings and recommendations. (Waggoner, D)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(HC)Jones v. Board of Prison Terms Doc. 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH JONES, 11 12 13 14 Petitioner, vs. BOARD OF PRISON TERMS, Respondent. 15 16 No. CIV S-07-2173 MCE JFM P FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS / A recent court order was served on petitioner’s address of record and returned by 17 the postal service. It appears that petitioner has failed to comply with Local Rule 83-182(f), 18 which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change. 19 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for 20 petitioner's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 83-182(f) 21 and 11-110 (E.D. Cal. 1997). 22 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 23 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty 24 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written 25 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 26 Findings and Recommendations.” Petitioner is advised that failure to file objections within the 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 2 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 DATED: February 6, 2008. 4 5 6 7 8 /ke/001 jone2173.133a 9 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.
