Parlante v. Boulanger et al
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, recommending that action be dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to provide Court with complete address or notify Court of address change, signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 8/26/2011. Within 28 days after being served with these F/Rs, plaintiff may file and serve written Objections with Court. Clerk is ORDERED to serve this Order upon plaintiff at address of record and Creekview Drive address in Merced, CA. (Marciel, M)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
No. CIV S-11-1709 JAM DAD PS
S. BOULANGER, et al.,
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se with a civil rights complaint against two individuals.
On July 6, 2011, the court served upon plaintiff at his address of record an order setting status
(pretrial scheduling) conference. (Doc. No. 4.) The court’s records reflect that on July 13, 2011,
plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned to the court by the postal service marked
“Undeliverable, RTS - Insufficient Address.” In a document filed August 18, 2011, counsel for
defendant Boulanger informed the court that plaintiff’s copy of defendant’s July 25, 2011 motion
to quash or dismiss was returned to counsel marked “Return to Sender - Insufficient Address.”
(Doc. No. 8.) Moreover, plaintiff did not appear at the hearing of defendant’s motion on August
It appears that plaintiff failed to provide the court with his complete address at the
commencement of the action or he has failed to comply with Local Rule 182, which requires
every party, including any party proceeding in propria persona, to notify the court and all other
parties of any change of address. Local Rule 182(f). Absent proper notice of a change of
address, service of documents at a party’s address of record is fully effective. Id. Failure to
comply with the court’s rules or with any order of the court may be grounds for imposition by the
court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or rule or within the inherent power of the
court. Local Rule 110.
Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk shall serve this
order on plaintiff at his address of record and also c/o Satoko Parlante at 2305 Creekview Dr.,
Merced, CA 95340; and
IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice due to
plaintiff’s failure to provide the court with a complete address at the commencement of the case
or his failure to notify the court of a change of address.
These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States
District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within
twenty-eight days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file
and serve written objections with the court. A document containing objections should be titled
“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff’s failure to file
objections within the specified time may, under certain circumstances, waive the right to appeal
the District Court’s order regarding the findings and recommendations. See Martinez v. Ylst,
951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
DATED: August 26, 2011.
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?