UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 21, 2012
ERNESTO ANTONIO MEJIA,
JOHNNY WILLIAMS, JR.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge
ORDER TO PETITIONER TO SHOW CAUSE NO LATER THAN TEN DAYS AFTER THE ) DATE OF SERVICE OF THIS ORDER WHY THE PETITION SHOULD NOT BE ) DISMISSED FOR PETITIONER'S FAILURE TO UPDATE HIS ADDRESS AND TO COMPLY WITH AN ORDER OF THE COURT
Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis with a petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1), the parties have consented to the jurisdiction of the United States Magistrate Judge to conduct all further proceedings in the case, including the entry of final judgment, by manifesting their consent in writings signed by the parties or their representatives and filed by Petitioner on May 13, 2010, and on behalf of Respondent on January 10, 2011. Pending before the Court is the petition, which was filed on April 22, 2010, and transferred to the Fresno Division of this Court on April 30, 2010. Respondent filed an answer with supporting documentation on January 21, 2011. Petitioner filed identical traverses, each styled as an informal reply, on February 14, 2011, and March 4, 2011.
On April 4, 2012, the Court served on the parties an order directing Respondent to file supplemental briefing and permitting Petitioner to file a reply. On April 18, 2012, the copy of the order that had been mailed to Petitioner was returned as "Undeliverable, RTS-Refused." The docket does not reflect that Petitioner has filed an updated address since the mail was returned.
Pursuant to Local Rule 183(b), a party appearing in propria persona is required to keep the Court informed of his or her current address at all times. Local Rule 183(b) further provides in pertinent part:
If mail directed to a plaintiff in propria persona by the Clerk is returned by the U.S.
Postal Service, and if such plaintiff fails to notify the Court and opposing parties within sixty-three (63) days thereafter of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Petitioner has delayed in giving the Court updated address information for approximately sixty days. It is also unclear whether the Court has Petitioner's correct address information.
Petitioner is INFORMED that his delay in informing the Court of current address information constitutes a failure to prosecute and a failure to comply with an order and rule of the Court pursuant to Local Rule 110.
Accordingly, Petitioner is ORDERED to show cause no later than ten (10) days after the date of service of this order why the petition should not be dismissed for Petitioner's failure to notify the Court and the parties of his current address.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.