Bruton v. Auburn City Police Department et al

Filing 17

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 5 Complaint filed by Ernest Bruton. Objections to R&R due by 11/29/2010, Noting Date 11/29/2010, by Hon. Brian A Tsuchida. (Attachments: # 1 Cover Letter, # 2 Proposed Order of Dismissal, # 3 Proposed Judgment Order) Report and recommendation with attachments mailed to plaintiff on 11/8/2010.(GS)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8 ERNEST BRUTON,

Plaintiff,

9
v.
10

AUBURN CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, et
11 al.,
Defendants.

12
13

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. C10-780-RAJ-BAT
REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

The Court ordered plaintiff Ernest Bruton, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, to show

14 cause by October 25, 2010, why his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights action should not be dismissed
15 for failure to prosecute by failing to keep the Court advised of his current address. Dkt. 15. To
16 this date, petitioner has not responded to the show-cause order. The Court recommends this civil
17 rights action be DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to prosecute under Local Rule CR
18 41(b)(2).
19

Plaintiff submitted his IFP application and his proposed complaint to the Court on May 7,

20 2010. Dkt. 1. The Court granted plaintiff’s IFP application on May 17, 2010; his complaint was
21 deemed filed on that day. Dkts. 4, 5. The Court ordered service of the complaint on defendants.
22 Dkts. 6, 7. The Court’s grant of IFP status sent to plaintiff was returned in the mail as
23 undeliverable on May 28, 2010. Dkt. 12. On August 24, 2010, the Court ordered plaintiff to

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION- 1

1 show cause why his case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and advised him of his
2 duty to inform the Court of any changes to his address. Dkt. 15. The Court’s order to show
3 cause sent to plaintiff was returned in the mail. Dkt. 16.
4

In the order to show cause, the Court warned plaintiff that his failure to respond to the show-

5 cause order would result in dismissal by the district judged assigned to this case. Plaintiff failed
6 to respond to the show-cause order and thus has declined to keep the Court advised of his current
7 address and whether he wishes to continue this action.
8

The Court recommends this § 1983 action be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to

9 prosecute. Local Rule CR 41(b)(2). A proposed order is attached.
10

DATED this 8th day of November, 2010.

11

A

12

BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA
United States Magistrate Judge

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION- 2