Dial v. Heatley et al

Filing 59

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 3/13/15 ORDERING that the Clerk of Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to telephone CHCF forthwith to identify which facility plaintiff is assigned, and therefore the mailing address that the Clerk shall th en note on the docket as plaintiffs current address of record, including for purposes of serving the instant order. Further, on February 12, 2015, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment in this action. Plaintiffs opposition was due on or bef ore March 5, 2015. See Local Rule 230(l). Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within 21 days after the filing date of this order, plaintiff shall file and serve an opposition to the motion for summary judgment or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).(Dillon, M)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

RODNEY DIAL,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:12-cv-2569 AC P

v.

ORDER

SCOTT HEATLEY, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights

17
18

action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In response to this court’s order filed January 22,

19

2015, defendants informed the court that plaintiff is now incarcerated at the California

20

Correctional Health Care Facility (CHCF) in Stockton, California, and that his deposition was

21

completed there on January 14, 2015. See ECF No. 57. Review of the Inmate Locator website

22

operated by the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation indicates that plaintiff

23

remains incarcerated at CHCF.1

24

////

25

////

26

1

27
28

See http://inmatelocator.cdcr.ca.gov/. This Court may take judicial notice of facts that are
capable of accurate determination by sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.
Fed. R. Evid. 201; see also City of Sausalito v. O'Neill, 386 F.3d 1186, 1224 n.2 (9th Cir. 2004)
(“We may take judicial notice of a record of a state agency not subject to reasonable dispute.”).

Accordingly, although plaintiff has not filed a notice of change of address,2 the Clerk of

1
2

Court is HEREBY DIRECTED to telephone CHCF forthwith to identify which facility plaintiff is

3

assigned, and therefore the mailing address that the Clerk shall then note on the docket as

4

plaintiff’s current address of record, including for purposes of serving the instant order.

5

Further, on February 12, 2015, defendant filed a motion for summary judgment in this

6

action. Plaintiff’s opposition was due on or before March 5, 2015. See Local Rule 230(l).

7

Plaintiff has not opposed the motion. Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that,

8

within twenty-one days after the filing date of this order, plaintiff shall file and serve an

9

opposition to the motion for summary judgment or a statement of non-opposition. Failure to

10

comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice for failure to

11

prosecute, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

12

DATED: March 13, 2015

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2

Parties proceeding in pro se are under a continuing duty to notify the court of any address
change, and failure to do so provides grounds for dismissal. See Local Rules 182(f), 183(b).
2