Wilkins v. Santa Clara Sheriffs Department, et al.

Filing 10

ORDER OF DISMISSAL. This action DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by Judge Edward M. Chen on 2/16/2021. (afmS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/16/2021)Any non-CM/ECF Participants have been served by First Class Mail to the addresses of record listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF)

1
2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

6
7

In Re

Case No. 20-cv-01939-EMC

8

DEON MCNEIL WILKINS,

Case No. 20-cv-03256-EMC

9

Plaintiff.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

10

United States District Court
Northern District of California

11
12
13

On November 18, 2020, mail was sent from the Court to Plaintiff at the address he

14

provided to the Court and was returned undelivered on December 7, 2020, bearing a stamp that

15

read “return to sender, not at this address.” Docket No. 19 in Case No. 20-cv-1939 EMC.

16

Plaintiff has not provided any address other than the address to which the undeliverable mail was

17

sent. More than sixty days have passed since the mail was returned to the Court undelivered.

18

Plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 3-11(a) which requires a party proceeding pro se to

19

“promptly file with the Court and serve upon all opposing parties a Notice of Change of Address

20

specifying the new address” when his address changes. Local Rule 3-11(b) allows the Court to

21

dismiss a complaint without prejudice when mail directed to a pro se party is returned as not

22

deliverable and the pro se party fails to send written notice of his current address within sixty days

23

of the return of the undelivered mail. These actions are DISMISSED without prejudice because

24

Plaintiff failed to keep the Court informed of his address in compliance with Local Rule 3-11(a).

25
26
27
28

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 16, 2021
______________________________________
EDWARD M. CHEN
United States District Judge