Griffin v. Kern Medical Center

Filing 17

ORDER Vacating 8 11 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 06/07/2010. (Flores, E)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action. This matter was 17 referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 18 302. 19 Plaintiff initiated this action by civil complaint filed on September 30, 2009. On the face 20 page of the complaint, plaintiff indicated that he was housed at Wasco State Prison. On October 21 13, 2009, plaintiff was directed to complete and return to the Court an application to proceed in 22 forma pauperis. Plaintiff failed to do so and on December 22, 2009, a recommendation of 23 dismissal was entered. On January 5, 2010, plaintiff requested an extension of time in which to 24 file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The motion indicated that plaintiff was housed 25 at Wasco State Prison. The motion was granted on January 14, 2010. Plaintiff failed to file his 26 application, and on April 13, 2010, findings and recommendations were entered recommending 27 that this action be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to prosecute. On May 3, 2010, plaintiff filed 28 ROBERT GRIFFIN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) KERN MEDICAL CENTER, ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) NO. 1:09-CV-01782-AWI-MJS-PC ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Docs. 8, 11 ) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

an application to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff's application indicated that he had been transferred to Pleasant Valley State Prison. On May 5, 2010, the docket was updated to reflect plaintiff's current address at Pleasant Valley State Prison. Because it appears that Plaintiff may have failed to comply with the earlier order because it was sent to an address that was no longer current, the court will vacate the recommendations of dismissal. Plaintiff is advised that Local Rule 183(b) requires a party appearing pro se to keep the Court and opposing parties advised as to his current address. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the earlier recommendations of dismissal are vacated.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: ci4d6 June 7, 2010 /s/ UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Michael J. Seng

2