(HC) Williams v. Pallares

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA TANISHIA SAVANNAH WILLIAMS, No. 2:20-cv-01519 GGH P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS MICHAEL PALLARES, Acting Warden, 15 Respondent.

17 Petitioner, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §2254. The matter was referred to the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Local Rule 302(c).

20 On July 3, 2020, petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. ECF No. 1. On August 7, 2020, the court granted petitioner thirty days to file a motion for stay and abeyance pursuant to Rhines v. Weber, 544 U.S. 269 (2005) based on a failure to exhaust state court remedies. ECF No. 3. Petitioner was further “warned that failure to file a motion for stay and abeyance within the court’s deadline will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed as unexhausted. Id. at 3. Petitioner has not responded to the court’s orders, nor taken any action to prosecute this case.

27 Moreover, review of the case docket indicates the copy of the court’s August 7, 2020 was served by mail on Petitioner on two separate occasions and returned on August 25, 2020 and September 9, 2020 as undeliverable. However, pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service at the address listed on the docket remains fully effective in the absence of a notification of change of address.

4 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall assign this case to a district judge.

6 Further, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and for failure to comply with the court’s order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110.

9 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)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, petitioner may file written objections with the court. The 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. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

15 Dated: September 28, 2020 /s/ Gregory G. Hollows UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE