(HC) Tumbaco v. Warden

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA CALIXTO TUMBACO, No. 2:23-cv-1144 TLN CKD P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WARDEN, F.C.I. HERLONG, 15 Respondent.

17 Petitioner is a federal prisoner proceeding pro se. On August 13, 2023, petitioner’s 28 18 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for a writ of habeas corpus was dismissed with leave to amend. Petitioner was granted 30 days to file an amended petition and was warned that failure to file an amended petition would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. Petitioner has not filed an amended petition.

22 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the court’s August 13, 2023 order was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.

26 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed.

27 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, petitioner may file written || objections with the court. Such a document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate || Judge’s Findings and Recommendations. Petitioner is advised that 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).

6 | Dated: September 15, 2023 / a8 } i | / p , {a ce 7 CAROLYNK. DELANEY 8 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE tumb1144.fs