Gaines v. Hartley et al

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, without Prejudce, for Failure to Comply with a Court Order signed by Chief Judge Anthony W. Ishii on 06/26/2012. CASE CLOSED. (Flores, E)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
8
9

R. GAINES,

10
11
12
13

CASE NO. 1:12-cv–00715-AWI-BAM PC
Plaintiff,

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT
PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY
WITH A COURT ORDER

v.
JAMES D. HARTLEY, et al.,
Defendants.
/

14
15

Plaintiff R. Gaines is a state prisoner proceeding pro se in this civil rights action pursuant to

16

42 U.S.C. § 1983. On May 3, 2012, the complaint and motion to proceed informa pauperis were

17

filed and new case documents were mailed to Plaintiff.1 The Court was unable to find any inmate

18

with the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”) number provided by

19

Plaintiff in the CDCR Inmate Locator System, nor did the system show any inmate by this name

20

housed at Avenal State Prison. Because the Court was unable to determine if Plaintiff was entitled

21

to proceed in forma pauperis in this action, an order issued on May 4, 2012, requiring Plaintiff to

22

provide his full name and correct CDCR number to the Court. Plaintiff was advised that failure to

23

comply with the order would result in this action being dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to

24

obey a court order. More than fifteen days has passed and Plaintiff has failed to comply or otherwise

25

respond to the Court’s order.

26
27
28

1
On May 10, 2012, the new case documents were returned marked undeliverable, not at ASP. On June 6,
2012, the order assigning this case to the Honorable Anthony W . Ishii was returned as undeliverable, marked
“Paroled”. Plaintiff has not notified the Court of any change in his address. Absent such notice, service at a party’s
prior address is fully effective. Local Rule 182(f).

1

1

Local Rule 110 provides that “[f]ailure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules

2

or with any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any and all

3

sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court.” Accordingly, this action is dismissed, without

4

prejudice, for failure to comply with a court order, and all pending motions are terminated.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8

Dated:
0m8i78

June 26, 2012
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2