From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McNearney v. Citicorp Credit Services, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 7, 2006
No. CIV S-06-576 WBS EFB PS (E.D. Cal. Sep. 7, 2006)

Opinion

No. CIV S-06-576 WBS EFB PS.

September 7, 2006


ORDER


On August 29, 2006, plaintiff filed a "Declaration" requesting more time to object to the Findings and Recommendations made by Magistrate Judge Gregory H. Hollows on July 25, 2006. Plaintiff claims that he never received a copy of the Findings and Recommendations, even though they were served on plaintiff via U.S. Mail at the address he currently uses. He states that he only learned that the Findings and Recommendations had been issued when he called the Clerk on August 22, 2006. According to plaintiff, his address is a mailbox maintained with Mailbox Express, but in previous filings he has referred to his mailbox number as a "suite." It is possible that this discrepancy caused plaintiff not to receive the Findings and Recommendations.

This case was initially assigned to now retired Magistrate Judge Peter A. Nowinski. By order of Chief Judge David F. Levi, this case was reassigned to the undersigned, Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan, on August 29, 2006. In the interim period between Judge Nowinski's retirement and Judge Brennan's appointment, this case was temporarily assigned to Magistrate Judge Gregory H. Hollows, who issued the Findings and Recommendations referenced above.

Therefore, in the interest of justice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Clerk immediately serve on plaintiff another copy of the Findings and Recommendations at the following address: Ronald B. McNearney, c/o Mailbox Express, 3069 Alamo Drive, Mailbox Number #115, Vacaville, California 95687.

2. Notwithstanding the previously allotted time in the Findings and Recommendations, plaintiff shall have 10 days from the date of this order to file objections to the Findings and Recommendations, should he so desire. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." The failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Maritnez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991).

3. No further extensions shall be granted.


Summaries of

McNearney v. Citicorp Credit Services, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. California
Sep 7, 2006
No. CIV S-06-576 WBS EFB PS (E.D. Cal. Sep. 7, 2006)
Case details for

McNearney v. Citicorp Credit Services, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:RONALD B. McNEARNEY, Plaintiffs, v. CITICORP CREDIT SERVICES, INC., et…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 7, 2006

Citations

No. CIV S-06-576 WBS EFB PS (E.D. Cal. Sep. 7, 2006)