Loveless v. Fields
ORDER OF DISMISSAL without prejudice because plaintiff failed to keep the court informed of his address in compliance with Local Rule 3-11(a). (SI, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 7/29/2010)
Loveless v. Fields
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 United United States District Court For the Northern District of California 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
RASHEED SHARIF LOVELESS, SR., Plaintiff, v. DEPUTY FITZGERALD FIELDS, Defendant. /
No. C 09-4281 SI (pr) ORDER OF DISMISSAL
On April 13, 2010, mail was sent to plaintiff at the county jail address he provided to the court and was returned undelivered on April 22, 2010, and marked "not at this address" and "return to sender." Plaintiff has not provided any address other than the one to which the undeliverable mail was sent. More than sixty days have passed since the mail was returned to the court undelivered. Plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 3-11(a) which requires that a party proceeding pro se must "promptly file with the Court and serve upon all opposing parties a Notice of Change of Address specifying the new address" when his address changes. Local Rule 3-11(b) allows the court to dismiss a complaint without prejudice when mail directed to a pro se party is returned as not deliverable and the pro se party fails to file a notice of his current address within sixty days of the return of the undelivered mail. For the foregoing reasons, this action is dismissed without prejudice because plaintiff failed to keep the court informed of his address in compliance with Local Rule 3-11(a). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 29, 2010 _______________________ SUSAN ILLSTON United States District Judge
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?