Lopez, et al. v. Department of Veteran Affairs
FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/4/2017 RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk be directed to close this case. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections to F&R due within 14 days. (Zignago, K.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
LOPEZ, et al.,
No. 2:17-cv-01474-JAM-KJN (PS)
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
DEPARTMENT OF VETERAN
Plaintiffs, who proceed pro se, filed this action and requested leave to proceed in forma
pauperis pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. (ECF Nos. 1, 2.) On August 29, 2017, the court denied
plaintiffs’ applications to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered plaintiffs to “either (a) pay the
applicable filing fee or (b) each file an application to proceed in forma pauperis that adequately
demonstrates that each plaintiff is unable to pay the filing fee” within 28 days. (ECF No. 3.)
Moreover, the court admonished plaintiffs that “failure to either pay the filing fee or file sufficient
applications to proceed in forma pauperis by the above deadline will result in a recommendation
that the action be dismissed.” (Id.)
On September 21, 2017, the court’s order sent to plaintiffs was returned to the court as
undeliverable. It is plaintiffs’ duty to keep the court informed of their current addresses, and
service of the court’s order at the address on record was effective absent the filing of a notice of
change of address. In relevant part, Local Rule 182(f) provides: “Each appearing attorney and
pro se party is under a continuing duty to notify the Clerk and all other parties of any change of
address or telephone number of the attorney or the pro se party. Absent such notice, service of
documents at the prior address of the attorney or pro se party shall be fully effective.”
Because plaintiffs have failed to pay the filing fee or submit revised applications to
proceed in forma pauperis within 28 days of the court’s previous order, it appears that they have
chosen to abandon this action.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:
The action be dismissed without prejudice.
The Clerk of Court be directed to close this case.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge
assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days
after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written
objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned
“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections
within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v.
Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED
Dated: October 4, 2017
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?