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)

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