Marshall v. Unknown
Filing
11
ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Allison Claire on 6/20/2018 ORDERING the Clerk shall verify and accurately indicate on the docket plaintiff's current address. The Clerk shall send plaintiff, together with this order, one copy of the following: (a) plaintiff's original complaint 1 ; (b) the court's screening order 4 ; and (c) a blank form complaint form to pursue a civil rights action. Plaintiff may file a proposed First Amended Complaint, within 30 days. Failure of plaintiff to timely file a proposed First Amended Complaint will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. (Yin, K)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
MAEWEATHER MARSHALL,
aka MAYWEATHER MARSHALL,1
12
Plaintiff,
13
No. 2:17-cv-1650 AC P
ORDER
v.
14
UNKNOWN,
15
Defendant.
16
17
18
Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with this action filed pursuant 42 U.S.C. §
19
1983. Plaintiff has consented to the jurisdiction of the undersigned Magistrate Judge for all
20
purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and Local Rule 305(a). See ECF No. 7.
21
By order filed September 8, 2017, this court granted plaintiff’s request to proceed in
22
forma pauperis but dismissed plaintiff’s original complaint with leave to file a proposed First
23
Amended Complaint within thirty days. See ECF No. 4. The court informed plaintiff of the
24
deficiencies in his original complaint and the requirements for stating potentially cognizable
25
claims in an amended complaint. Id. Plaintiff was informed that failure to timely file an
26
27
28
1
The first spelling of plaintiff’s name reflects the spelling in plaintiff’s own documents filed in
this case; the second spelling is used by the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (CDCR).
1
amended complaint would result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice. Id. at 6.
2
By order filed September 26, 2017, the court granted plaintiff’s request for extended time
3
to comply with the court’s September 8, 2017 order; the deadline was extended to thirty days
4
after service of the September 26, 2017 order. See ECF No. 9.
5
Thereafter, on December 27, 2017, plaintiff filed a notice of change of address (indicating
6
that he was located at either Salinas Valley State Prison or San Quentin State Prison) but did not
7
otherwise respond to the court’s order. See ECF No. 10. CDCR’s Inmate Locator website
8
indicates that plaintiff is presently incarcerated at California State Prison Corcoran (CSP-COR).2
9
In an abundance of caution, before recommending dismissal of this case for failure to comply
10
with the court’s order, the court will direct the Clerk of Court to re-serve the essential documents
11
in this case to plaintiff at his current address.
12
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
13
1. The Clerk of Court is directed to verify and accurately indicate on the docket plaintiff’s
14
current address.
15
2. The Clerk of Court is further directed to send plaintiff, together with a copy of this
16
order, one copy each of the following: (a) plaintiff’s original complaint (ECF No. 1 (8 pp.)); (b)
17
the court’s screening order filed September 8, 2017 (ECF No. 4 (6 pp.)); and (c) a blank form
18
complaint used by prisoners in this district to pursue a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
19
20
3. If plaintiff intends to proceed with this case, he shall file a proposed First Amended
Complaint, on the form provided herein, within thirty (30) days after the filing date of this order.
21
22
4. Failure of plaintiff to timely file a proposed First Amended Complaint will result in a
recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice.
23
24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 20, 2018
25
26
27
28
2
See http://inmatelocator.cdcr.ca.gov/search.aspx. See also Fed. R. Evid. 201 (court may take
judicial notice of facts that are capable of accurate determination by sources whose accuracy
cannot reasonably be questioned).
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?