Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Miguel v. Howell, 2:18-cv-02111-RFB-PAL. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20190409d65 Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 06, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER RICHARD F. BOULWARE, II , District Judge . In light of petitioner's notice of change of address (ECF No. 22), the fact that petitioner was paroled at around the same time respondents served him, at his institutional address, with the motion to dismiss and related exhibits, respondents' notice that one of the packages it sent to petitioner, containing exhibits, was returned as undeliverable (ECF No. 21), and the fact petitioner has failed to respond to the pending motion to dismiss, it
More

ORDER

In light of petitioner's notice of change of address (ECF No. 22), the fact that petitioner was paroled at around the same time respondents served him, at his institutional address, with the motion to dismiss and related exhibits, respondents' notice that one of the packages it sent to petitioner, containing exhibits, was returned as undeliverable (ECF No. 21), and the fact petitioner has failed to respond to the pending motion to dismiss, it appears possible that petitioner has not received the motion to dismiss — even though the motion to dismiss was not returned as undeliverable.

In an abundance of caution, IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Clerk of Court will send a copy of the motion to dismiss (ECF No. 8) to petitioner at his last address of record.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that petitioner will have thirty days from the date of entry of this order to respond to the motion to dismiss.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents will re-send the package that was returned as undeliverable to petitioner his new address of record.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer