Thomas David Rice v. WVDC Facility Commander et al

Filing 39

MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS RE ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE by Magistrate Judge Margaret A. Nagle. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 7/26/2013. (ec)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Case No.: EDCV 12-1729-GHK (MAN)

Date: July 12, 2013

Title: Thomas David Rice v. W.V.D.C., et al.
===============================================================================
DOCKET ENTRY:

Order To Show Cause Re: Possible Dismissal

===============================================================================
PRESENT:
Hon. Margaret A. Nagle , United States Magistrate Judge
Earlene Carson
Deputy Clerk
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF:

N/A

N/A
Court Reporter/Tape No.
ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:

N/A

PROCEEDINGS (In Chambers):
On June 19, 2013, the Court issued an Order in this case (“June 19 Order”), which established a briefing scheduled
for defendants’ pending motion to dismiss and advised plaintiff of matters related to the motion. On June 26, 2013,
the United States Postal Service returned as undeliverable the copy of the June 19 Order served upon plaintiff by
mail at his docket address of record; the return enveloped bore a sticker indicating “Return to Sender” on the ground
that plaintiff is “Out Of Custody.”
Pursuant to Local Rule 41-6, a pro se litigant is required to keep the Court and opposing parties apprised of the
litigant’s current address. The Rule further provides that:
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.
More than 15 days have passed since the return of the June 19 Order, and plaintiff has not filed a notice of his new
address, as required by Local Rule 41-6, or otherwise contacted the Court to provide a current address. Although
it is plaintiff’s obligation to keep the Court apprized of his current address, the Court’s staff nonetheless has checked
the Inmate Locator function for the County of San Bernardino website and has determined that there no longer is
an entry for plaintiff at West Valley Detention Center, which confirms that he is out of custody.
Plaintiff’s failure to file a notice of the change in his address, and thus to notify the Court of his new address,
violates Local Rule 41-6. Accordingly, plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE why this action should not be
dismissed for want of prosecution. By no later than July 26, 2013, plaintiff shall file a response to this Order To
MINUTES FORM 11
CIVIL - GEN

Initials of Deputy Clerk _efc____

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
CIVIL MINUTES--GENERAL
Case No. EDCV 12-1729-GHK (MAN)

Date: July 12, 2013

Show Cause. Alternatively, plaintiff may discharge his obligation under this Order To Show Cause by filing and
serving the change of address notice required by Local Rule 41-6 by no later than the above-noted July 26, 2013
deadline.
Plaintiff is advised that, should he fail to comply with this Order by the above deadline, the
Court will presume that plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this action and will recommend
that the case be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

MINUTES FORM 11
CIVIL - GEN

Initials of Deputy Clerk _efc____