Paul Kinney v. Steven Langford et al

Filing 55

(In Chambers): Order to Show Cause Why This Case Should Not Be Dismissed For Failure to Update Address and for Want of Prosecution by Magistrate Judge Maria A. Audero. Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE by March 11, 2019 why the Court should not recommend that the case be dismissed for want of prosecution. (See document for details.) (sbou)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 2:18-cv-01995-SVW (MAA)

Date: February 8, 2019

Title

Paul Kinney v. Steven Langford, et al.

Present:

The Honorable MARIA A. AUDERO, United States Magistrate Judge
Cheryl Wynn
Deputy Clerk

N/A
Court Reporter / Recorder

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff:
N/A

Attorneys Present for Defendants:
N/A

Proceedings (In Chambers):

Order to Show Cause Why This Case Should Not Be
Dismissed For Failure to Update Address and for Want of
Prosecution

On February 7, 2019, the Court received mail, which had been directed to Plaintiff, returned
and undelivered by the Postal Service. (ECF No. 54.)
Central District of California Local Rule 41-6 states:
Dismissal - Failure of Pro Se Plaintiff to Keep Court Apprised of Current
Address. A party proceeding pro se shall keep the Court and opposing parties
apprised of such party’s current address and telephone number, if any, and e-mail
address, if any. If mail directed by the Clerk to a pro se plaintiff’s address of
record is returned undelivered by the Postal Service, and if, within fifteen (15)
days of the service date, such plaintiff fails to notify, in writing, the Court and
opposing parties of said plaintiff’s current address, the Court may dismiss the
action with or without prejudice for want of prosecution.
C.D. Cal. L.R. 41-6.
Plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE by March 11, 2019 why the Court should not
recommend that the case be dismissed for want of prosecution. C.D. Cal. L.R. 41-1. If on or before
that date, Plaintiff provides the Court his current address and telephone number, if any, and e-mail
address, if any, this Order to Show Cause will be discharged, and no additional action need be taken.
Plaintiff is advised that failure to respond to this Order to Show Cause will result in a

CV-90 (03/15)

Civil Minutes – General

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL
Case No. 2:18-cv-01995-SVW (MAA)
Title

Date: February 8, 2019

Paul Kinney v. Steven Langford, et al.

recommendation that the Complaint be dismissed. See C.D. Cal. L.R. 41-6; Carey v. King, 856 F.2d
1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988).
It is so ordered.

Initials of Preparer

CV-90 (03/15)

Civil Minutes – General

cw

Page 2 of 2