IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
January 15, 2010
KUMASI KUFA, PETITIONER,
KEN CLARK, RESPONDENT.
On March 23, 2009, defendants filed a motion to dismiss. On April 28, 2009, plaintiff was granted an extension of time to file an opposition. Petitioner has filed no opposition, although court records reflect petitioner was properly served with notice of the motion and the order granting an extension of time at petitioner's address of record. See Docket No. 14.
On July 14, 2009, petitioner was ordered to show cause, within twenty days, why his action should not be dismissed. The twenty day period has now expired, and petitioner has not shown cause or otherwise responded to the court's order. Moreover, it appears from the file that petitioner's copy of the order to show cause was returned. Nonetheless, petitioner was properly served with the order. It is petitioner's responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 83-182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.
Both parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge to order the entry of judgment in this case. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (c)(1). For the foregoing reasons, the court will dismiss this action without prejudice. See Local Rule 11-110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.