Polk v. Placer County et al

Filing 13

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/26/2017 DISMISSING this action without prejudice. CASE CLOSED.(Yin, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

DARRELL E. POLK,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:16-cv-1034 KJN P

v.

ORDER

PLACER COUNTY, et al.,

15

Defendants.

16
Plaintiff consented to proceed before the undersigned for all purposes. See 28 U.S.C.

17
18

§ 636(c). By order filed January 4, 2017, plaintiff was ordered to show cause, within fourteen

19

days, why this action should not be dismissed. The fourteen day period has now expired, and

20

plaintiff has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court’s order.1
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice.

21
22

See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

23

Dated: January 26, 2017

24

polk1034.fsc

25
26
27
28

1

Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order, as well as an earlier order,
were returned, plaintiff 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 party is fully effective.
1