IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 13, 2009
STEVEN MARTIN, PLAINTIFF,
SACRAMENTO SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Craig M. Kellison United States Magistrate Judge
Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brings this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff has consented to Magistrate Judge jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)) and no other party has been served or appeared in the action. Pending before the court is plaintiff's complaint (Doc. 1) and a March 2, 2009, order to show cause (Doc. 11). Plaintiff has failed to timely respond to the order to show cause.
In the order to show cause, the court stated:
A recent court order was served on plaintiff's address of record and returned by the postal service. It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 83-182(f), which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change.
The court directed plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 83-182(f) and 11-110. Plaintiff was warned that failure to respond to the court's order may result in dismissal of the action. See id. Plaintiff has failed to respond. The court, therefore, finds it appropriate to dismiss this case for plaintiff's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address, as well as for failure to prosecute and comply with court rules and orders. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment of dismissal and close this file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.