UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 24, 2009
CALIFORNIA PAROLE DEPARTMENT, ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable Frederick F. Mumm, United States Magistrate Judge
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
James Munoz None None Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No.
Proceedings: (IN CHAMBERS) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
On May 29, 2009, plaintiff Charlie Hanvey, proceeding pro se, filed the pending civil rights complaint. On June 2, 2009, the Court issued an order reassigning this case to Judge Andrew J. Guilford. On June 5, 2009, this Court issued an order dismissing the complaint and providing plaintiff up to July 6, 2009 to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff's service copies of that order, the Court's June 2, 2009 order and a third Court issued document have since been returned to the Court as undeliverable.
Pursuant to Local Rule 41-6:
A party proceeding pro se shall keep the Court and opposing parties apprised of such party's current address and telephone number, if any. If mail directed by the Clerk to a pro se plaintiff's address of record is returned undelivered by the Postal Service, and if, within fifteen (15) days of the service date, such plaintiff fails to notify, in writing, the Court and opposing parties of said plaintiff's current address, the Court may dismiss the action with or without prejudice for want of prosecution.
Local Rule 41-6; see Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988).
Plaintiff is ordered to show cause within fifteen (15) days of the date of this order why this action should not be dismissed for his failure to inform the Court of his change of address.
Failure to file a timely response to this order within the time specified will be deemed consent to the dismissal of this action.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.