UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 12, 2012
PABLO PRIETO, ET AL.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Present: The Honorable Sheri Pym, United States Magistrate Judge
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
Kimberly I. Carter None None
Deputy Clerk Court Reporter / Recorder Tape No. Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendant:
None Present None Present Proceedings: (In Chambers) Order to Show Cause Why Complaint Should Not Be Dismissed for Failure to Prosecute
On October 7, 2010, the court issued an Initial Order re: Civil Rights Cases in this case, instructing plaintiff, inter alia, that "plaintiff must immediately notify the court and defense counsel if his/her address changes and must provide the court with the new address and its effective date. Any failure by plaintiff to provide the court and defendants with plaintiff's current address, may result in a dismissal of the case for want prosecution. See Local Rule 41-6." Local Rule 41-6 states as follows: "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 notify, in writing, the Court and opposing parties of his current address, the Court may dismiss the action with or without prejudice for want of prosecution."
On April 13, 2012, plaintiff filed a notice of change of address to a detention center in Houston. Accordingly, plaintiff's address of record is now that Houston address.
On July 24, 2012, the court granted defendants' application for a 30-day extension all deadlines in this case. The court mailed that order to plaintiff at his Houston address of record. On or about August 6, 2012, that mailing was returned to the court as undeliverable, with a notation that plaintiff had moved.
On September 7, 2012, the court issued an order approving a request for substitution of counsel for defendant Bourn. The court mailed that order to plaintiff at his Houston address of record. That mailing was returned to the court as undeliverable or about October 5, 2012, with a notation that plaintiff was no longer at that address.
On October 9, 2012, plaintiff filed two motions with this court. Those motions reflected that plaintiff is now housed at the U.S. Penitentiary at Florence, Colorado. However, plaintiff failed to actually notify this court of his address change. Reflecting a new address on a filing is insufficient to alert the clerk's office of a need to change plaintiff's address of record.
It therefore appears that plaintiff has failed to follow the court's Order to immediately notify the court of a change of address. Plaintiff's failure to comply with the court's Order, and failure to comply with Local Rule 41-6, renders this action subject dismissal for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute.
Accordingly, within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, that is, by October 26, 2012, plaintiff is ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE, in writing, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and/or comply with a court order. Plaintiff may discharge this order to show cause by filing, by October 26, 2012, a notice change of address reflecting his current address.
Plaintiff is cautioned that his failure to timely file a response to this Order to Show will be deemed by the court as consent to the dismissal of this action without prejudice.
The Clerk of Court is directed to serve this order on plaintiff at his current address record, and also at the following address:
Reg. No. 16267-064 USP Florence ADMAX U.S. Penitentiary P.O. Box 8500 Florence, CO 81226
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.