Gary v. Department of Corrections et al

Filing 10

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 1/4/2017 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

REGINALD A. GARY,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14
15

No. 2:16-cv-2035 KJN P

v.

ORDER

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, et
al.,
Defendants.

16
17
18

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

19

§ 636(c). By order filed December 1, 2016, plaintiff was ordered to show cause, within fourteen

20

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

21

plaintiff has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court’s order.

22

Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff

23

was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current

24

address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of

25

the party is fully effective.

26

////

27

////

28
1

1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice.

2

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

3

Dated: January 4, 2017

4
5
6
gary2035.fsc

7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2