Hanley v. Opinski et al

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING Action for Failure to Provide a Current Address signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 2/17/2017. CASE CLOSED. (Sant Agata, S)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 ROLLAND HANLEY, 12 No. 1:16-cv-00391-DAD-MJS Plaintiff, 13 v. 14 OPINSKI et al., 15 ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE A CURRENT ADDRESS Defendants. 16 17 18 Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 19 On October 19, 2016 the assigned magistrate judge screened plaintiff’s complaint 20 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and found it stated a cognizable claim against defendant 21 Sergeant Doe for fabricating evidence against plaintiff. (Doc. No. 5.) The magistrate judge 22 found that the complaint failed to state any other cognizable claims against any of the other 23 named defendants. (Id.) Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended complaint or a notice of 24 willingness to proceed on his single cognizable claim within thirty days. (Id.) The order was 25 mailed on the date it was issued to plaintiff at his address of record. However, on November 3, 26 2016, the screening order was returned to the court by the U.S. Postal Service as undeliverable. 27 To date, plaintiff has still not filed a notice of change of address with this court as required nor 28 has he communicated with the court in any way. 1 1 Local Rule 183(b) requires a party proceeding pro se to keep the court apprised of his 2 current address: “If mail directed to a plaintiff in propria persona by the Clerk is returned by the 3 U.S. Postal service, and if such plaintiff fails to notify the Court and opposing parties within 4 sixty-three (63) days thereafter of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action without 5 prejudice for failure to prosecute.” Here, more than sixty-three days have passed without plaintiff 6 providing the court with his current address. 7 Accordingly, the action is hereby dismissed without prejudice, based on plaintiff’s failure 8 to keep the court apprised of his current address. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate any 9 pending motions and close this case. 10 11 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: February 17, 2017 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?