Dearmon v. Freeman et al

Filing 17

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/24/11 ORDERING that this action is dismissed without prejudice due to petitioner's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. 15 Motion to Compel is denied as moot; and defendants' request for sanctions is denied.Civil Case Terminated. CASE CLOSED.(Matson, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

ROBERT E. DEARMON, JR.,

11
12
13
14

Plaintiff,

No. 2:10-cv-2183 KJN P

vs.
A. FREEMAN, et al.,

ORDER

Defendants.
/

15
16

This action proceeds on plaintiff’s civil rights complaint filed pursuant to 42

17

U.S.C. § 1983. All parties consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned magistrate judge for

18

all purposes. (Dkt. Nos. 4, 14.) See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c); Local Rule 305(a).

19

On June 24, 2011, defendants filed a discovery motion (Dkt. No. 15) that required

20

plaintiff’s response within 21 days, pursuant to Local Rule 230(l). No response to the motion

21

was filed. On July 30, 2011, defendants’ counsel filed a declaration (Dkt. No. 16), in which she

22

states that the original discovery requests were returned to counsel from plaintiff’s last known

23

place of incarceration (San Quentin State Prison), “with a notation that Mr. Dearmon had paroled

24

from that institution on March 15, 2011 and had provided no new address.” (Id. at 2.) Counsel

25

states that she attempted to locate plaintiff through the “inmate locator website” operated by the

26

California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (“CDCR”), but the effort was
1

1

unsuccessful. Defendants request that this court grant their motion to compel, order sanctions

2

against plaintiff, and dismiss this case.

3

This court also attempted, without success, to locate plaintiff through CDCR’s

4

“Inmate Locator.” The last communication this court received from plaintiff was in January

5

2011, when plaintiff submitted the documents required for serving process on defendants. (Dkt.

6

No. 8.)

7

Plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 182(f), which requires that a party

8

appearing in propria persona promptly inform the court of any address change. There appears to

9

be no way to contact plaintiff.

10

Accordingly, given the passage of time, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this

11

action is dismissed without prejudice due to petitioner’s failure to keep the court apprised of his

12

current address. See Local Rules 182(f) and 110. Defendants’ motion to compel (Dkt. No. 15) is

13

denied as moot; defendants’ request for sanctions is denied.

14
15

SO ORDERED.
DATED: August 24, 2011

16
17

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19

dear2183.ord.dsms

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2