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.

Daniel K. Chestang v. Yahoo Inc.

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


April 5, 2012

DANIEL K. CHESTANG; TIFFANY VIGIL, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
YAHOO INC., IN OFFICIAL CAPACITY, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Kendall J. Newman United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER

Plaintiff Daniel K. Chestang*fn1 , a prisoner proceeding without counsel or "pro se", has filed a civil action alleging copyright infringement by defendant Yahoo! Inc. ("Yahoo"). The undersigned previously granted plaintiff Chestang in forma pauperis status, but dismissed his pleading with leave to amend. (Order, Dkt. No. 27.)

Currently pending before the court are: (1) plaintiff's "Second Amended Petition For Writ Of Habeas Corpus" (Dkt. No. 33), which the undersigned construes as a Second Amended Complaint; (2) a Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 35) filed by defendant Yahoo, Inc. ("Yahoo"); (3) plaintiff's "Motion for Judgment and Relief" (Dkt. No. 43); and (4) plaintiff's "Motion to Amend Motion To Request Ruling Due To Newly Discovered Evidence" (Dkt. No. 44).

On March 30, 2012, plaintiff filed a "Request for Status" with respect to this case. (Dkt. No. 45.) The court carefully considers the pleadings and record in this action and issues rulings in due course; multiple and duplicative filings do not expedite the process. The court appreciates the parties' patience in addressing the pending motions. The pending motions will be resolved in due course.

Further, in his review of the docket, the undersigned notes that correspondence previously sent to plaintiff Tiffany Vigil was returned as undeliverable on October 28, 2011. Ms. Vigil's Notice of Change of Address was due by January 6, 2012. To date, the court's electronic docket does not suggest that such Notice of Change of Address has been received. It appears that Ms. Vigil has failed to comply with Local Rule 183(b), which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change. More than sixty-three days have passed since the court order was returned by the postal service and Ms. Vigil has failed to notify the court of a current address.

For the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: Ms. Vigil shall notify the court of her current address within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order. Should Ms. Vigil fail to do so, the undersigned will recommend that Ms. Vigil be dismissed from this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


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.