Delgado v. CDCR Medical Health Care Department, et al

Filing 37

FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 8/22/11 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice due to petitioners failure to keep the court apprised of his current address; referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 14 days.(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10

JOSEPH DELGADO,

11
12
13

Plaintiff,

No. 2:10-cv-2379 MCE KJN P

vs.
CDCR MEDICAL HEALTH CARE
DEPARTMENT, et al.,

14
Defendants.

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

15
/
16
17

On August 11, 2011, Susan Coleman, counsel for the sole remaining defendant

18

(Dr. Wedell), filed a declaration stating that she had been informed by plaintiff’s last place of

19

incarceration that plaintiff was released on parole on July 2, 2011. (See Dkt. Nos. 35, 36.)

20

Counsel states that she is unable to proceed with plaintiff’s deposition (noticed for July 20, 2011)

21

or other discovery matters if she cannot contact plaintiff. The discovery deadline is August 26,

22

2011. (Dkt. No. 32.) Plaintiff has not communicated with the court since June 8, 2011. (Dkt.

23

No. 33.)

24

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

25

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

26

be no way to contact plaintiff. Defense counsel was informed, on July 13, 2011, by the litigation
1

1

department at the California Substance Abuse Treatment Facility (“SATF”), plaintiff’s last place

2

of incarceration, that plaintiff had not filed a change of address with that facility. Similarly,

3

plaintiff has not filed a change of address in this court, although he was released on parole more

4

than thirty days ago.

5

Accordingly, given the passage of time, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that

6

this action be dismissed without prejudice due to petitioner’s failure to keep the court apprised of

7

his current address. See Local Rules 182(f) and 110.

8

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District

9

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 14 days

10

after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections

11

with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings

12

and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within 14 days

13

after service of the objections. Failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the

14

right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

15

DATED: August 22, 2011

16
17

_____________________________________
KENDALL J. NEWMAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

18
19

delg2379.address

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2