Lamon v. Amrheign et al

Filing 10

ORDER Denying 9 Motion for Protective Order as Moot signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 05/08/2012. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11
12
13
14
15
16

BARRY LOUIS LAMON,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
B. AMRHEIGN, et al.,
)
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

1:12-cv-00296-GSA-PC
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
PROTECTIVE ORDER AS MOOT
(Doc. 9.)

17

Barry Louis Lamon ("Plaintiff") is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with

18

this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this

19

action on February 28, 2012. (Doc. 1.) On May 1, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion for a protective order.

20

(Doc. 9.)

21

Plaintiff requests an order protecting him from sanctions for his failure to respond to orders and

22

documents in this case, to the extent that he failed to respond to documents filed by defendants, or orders

23

issued by the Court, in this action since March 8, 2012. Plaintiff asserts that on March 8, 2012, he was

24

transferred from Corcoran State Prison ("CSP") to California State Prison-Sacramento for a court

25

proceeding in another action, and he was not returned to CSP until April 13, 2012. Plaintiff states that

26

he did not file a notice of change of address with the Court because he did not expect to be away from

27

CSP for such a long period of time, and because he is litigating at least nine court actions for which he

28

1

1

would need to file notices of change of address. Plaintiff seeks protection from sanctions in the event

2

that he missed a court deadline in this action because he did not receive his mail between March 8, 2012

3

and April 13, 2012.

4

A review of the court record for this action shows that Plaintiff has not missed any court

5

deadlines to date, and there are no court deadlines currently pending in this action. Therefore, Plaintiff's

6

motion for an order protecting him from sanctions is moot and shall be denied as such. Plaintiff is

7

advised that in the future, his failure to keep the Court apprised of his current address may result in the

8

dismissal of this action. Local Rule 183(b).

9
10

Based on the foregoing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for a protective order
is DENIED as moot.

11
12
13
14
15
16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17

Dated:
6i0kij

May 8, 2012

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2