(HC) Nordstrom v. Thompson

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA DONAVON NORDSTROM, Case No. 2:21-cv-01880-DAD-JDP (HC) 12 Petitioner, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PAUL THOMPSON, et al., 15 Respondents.

17 A recent court order was served on petitioner’s address of record and returned by the postal service. It appears that petitioner has failed to comply with Local Rule 182(f), which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change. More than sixty-three days have passed since the court order was returned by the postal service and petitioner has failed to notify the Court of a current address.

22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Local Rule 183(b).

24 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.” Any response to the | objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The | parties are advised that 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. Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

6 IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _ April 24, 2023 Q——— 8 JEREMY D. PETERSON 9 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE