Marceleno v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabiliation et al

Filing 8

ORDER in Response to Notice and Request 6 , signed by Magistrate Judge Gary S. Austin on 09/19/17. (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8
9

ERIK ABELINO MARCELENO,
Plaintiff,

10

v.

11
12
13

1:17-cv-01136-GSA-PC
ORDER IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE AND
REQUEST
(ECF No. 6.)

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS AND
REHABILITATION, et al.,
Defendants.

14
15
16

Erik Abelino Marceleno (“Plaintiff”) is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma

17

pauperis. Plaintiff filed the Complaint commencing this action on August 23, 2017. (ECF No.

18

1.)

19

On September 13, 2017, Plaintiff filed a notice and request for information. (ECF No.

20

6.) Plaintiff is concerned that he did not receive all of the documents mailed to him by the

21

court. Plaintiff asserts that he received copies of documents #1, 3, and 4, but not #2.

22

Plaintiff is advised that the court will not send him copies of every document entered on

23

the court’s docket. The court will serve Plaintiff with copies of all court orders, but not all

24

other documents. In this case, document #1 is Plaintiff’s Complaint, document #2 is Plaintiff’s

25

application to proceed in forma pauperis, document #3 includes prisoner new case documents,

26

First Informational Order, and order re consent, and document #4 is the court’s order granting

27

Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis. The court has mailed Plaintiff a copy of

28

his Complaint. However, the court will not serve Plaintiff with copies of other documents he
1

1

files with the court unless he also submits an extra copy of the document and a separate,

2

stamped, self-addressed envelope. As written in the court’s First Informational Order:

3
4
5
6

The Court does not need and will not file duplicates of documents. Local Rule
133(d)(2) (modified). If a party wants a file−stamped copy of a document
returned for the party's own benefit, a copy for that purpose and a re−addressed,
pre−paid postage envelope must be included. The Court will not make copies of
filed documents or provide postage or envelopes for free even for parties
proceeding in forma pauperis.

7

(ECF No. 3 at 3 ¶I.) Therefore, the court did not mail Plaintiff a copy of document #2, the

8

application to proceed in forma pauperis filed by Plaintiff.

9

Plaintiff is also advised that due to the large number of cases pending before this court,

10

the Clerk does not ordinarily provide written responses to requests for status of cases. Plaintiff

11

is advised that he shall receive notice in this action as a matter of course.1 Plaintiff can be

12

assured that he will receive notice, at his address of record, of rulings made in this case and

13

deadlines established in this case, provided he keeps the court informed of his current address.

14
15

Plaintiff should review the First Informational Order for important information about
litigating his case.

16
17
18

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

September 19, 2017

/s/ Gary S. Austin
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Plaintiff is required to keep the court informed of his current mailing address. Local Rule 182(f)
provides: “Each appearing attorney and pro se party is under a continuing duty to notify the Clerk and all other
parties of any change of address or telephone number of the attorney or the pro se party. Absent such notice,
service of documents at the prior address of the attorney or pro se party shall be fully effective. Separate notice
shall be filed and served on all parties in each action in which an appearance has been made.”
2