(HC) Abraria v. Warden ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 GREGORY RALPH ABRARIA, No. 2:21-cv-1161 TLN KJN P 12 Petitioner, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 WARDEN, et al., 15 Respondents. 16 17 A recent court order was served on petitioner’s address of record and returned by the 18 postal service. It appears that petitioner has failed to comply with Local Rule 182(f), which 19 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 without 21 prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Local Rule 183(b). 22 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 23 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 24 after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 25 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 26 Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within 27 fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections 28 //// 1 | within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. 2 | Yist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 3 | Dated: November 7, 2022 ' Foci) Aharon 5 KENDALL J. NE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 || abral161.133a 7 8 9 10 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28