Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Artemenko v. Washington Mutual Bank FA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


July 9, 2009

VYACHESLAV ARTEMENKO, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK FA, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gregory G. Hollows United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

A recent court order was served on plaintiffs' address of record and returned by the postal service. It appears that plaintiffs have 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.

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that defendants' amended motion to dismiss, presently scheduled for hearing on July 16, 2009, is vacated.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for plaintiffs' failure to keep the court apprised of their current address. See Local Rules 83-182(f) and 11-110.

These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiffs may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiffs are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

20090709

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.