Dawes v. Branson
Filing
12
ORDER DISMISSING Action for Failure to Provide Current Address; Clerk to Terminate Pending Motions and CLOSE CASE signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J. Seng on 7/14/2017. CASE CLOSED. (Sant Agata, S)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
CANUTE DAWES,
13
14
15
16
Plaintiff,
v.
R. BRANSON,
Defendants.
CASE NO. 1:16-cv-01364-MJS (PC)
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR
FAILURE TO PROVIDE CURRENT
ADDRESS
CLERK TO TERMIANTE PENDING
MOTIONS AND CLOSE CASE
17
18
19
Plaintiff is a state prisoner or former state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma
20
pauperis in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He has
21
consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction.
22
On April 17, 2017, the Court issued an order to show cause why the action should
23
not be dismissed for failure to obey a Court order and failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 11.)
24
On April 24, 2017, the order was returned to the Court as undeliverable. Plaintiff has not
25
since provided the Court with his current address.
26
Local Rule 183(b) requires a party proceeding pro se to keep the Court apprised
27
of his current address: “If mail directed to a plaintiff in propria persona by the Clerk is
28
1
returned by the U.S. Postal service, and if such plaintiff fails to notify the Court and
2
opposing parties within sixty-three (63) days thereafter of a current address, the Court
3
may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute.” Here, more than sixty-
4
three days have passed without Plaintiff providing the Court with his current address.
5
Accordingly, the action is HEREBY DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, based
6
on Plaintiff’s failure to provide a current address. The Clerk of Court shall terminate any
7
pending motions and close this case.
8
9
10
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
July 14, 2017
/s/
11
Michael J. Seng
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?