Tatum v. Beard et al

Filing 23

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Edmund F. Brennan on 6/6/2017 DISMISSING this action without prejudice. CASE CLOSED.(Yin, K)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 RICHARD EUGENE TATUM, 12 13 14 No. 2:15-cv-0551-EFB P Plaintiff, v. ORDER JEFFREY A. BEARD, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. This proceeding was referred to this court by Local Rule 302 pursuant to 28 19 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and is before the undersigned pursuant to plaintiff’s consent. See 28 U.S.C. 20 § 636; see also E.D. Cal. Local Rules, Appx. A, at (k)(4). 21 On April 28, 2017, the court screened plaintiff’s amended complaint pursuant to 28 22 U.S.C. § 1915A. The court dismissed plaintiff’s amended complaint, explained the deficiencies 23 therein and granted plaintiff thirty days in which file an amended complaint to cure the 24 deficiencies. ECF No. 22. The order warned plaintiff that failure to comply would result in this 25 action being dismissed for failure to prosecute. The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has 26 not filed an amended complaint, or otherwise responded to the court’s order.1 27 28 1 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, he was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the 1 1 A party’s failure to comply with any order or with the Local Rules “may be grounds for 2 imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the 3 inherent power of the Court.” E.D. Cal. Local Rule 110. The court may dismiss an action with or 4 without prejudice, as appropriate, if a party disobeys an order or the Local Rules. See Ferdik v. 5 Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1263 (9th Cir. 1992) (district court did not abuse discretion in 6 dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint for failing to obey an order to re-file an amended 7 complaint to comply with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 8 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for pro se plaintiff’s failure to comply with local rule 9 regarding notice of change of address affirmed). 10 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. 11 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); E. D. Cal. Local Rule 110. 12 Dated: June 6, 2017. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 party is fully effective. 2

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?