AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes

JULIAN RODRIGUEZ, Plaintiff, v. B. SCNUMMAN, Defendant.

KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ORDER AND FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

KENDALL J. NEWMAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On November 29, 2021, the court's November 15, 2021 order served on plaintiff's address of record was returned by the postal service. On December 20, 2021, the court issued an order lifting the stay of this action, and served the order on plaintiff at his address of record as well as on plaintiff at No. 095712430, Golden State Annex, 611 Frontage Road, McFarland, CA 93250. On January 3, 2022, the order served on plaintiff at his address of record was returned by the postal service. On January 18, 2022, the same order served on plaintiff at McFarland, CA, was returned by the postal service.

Plaintiff 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 on November 29, 2021, and plaintiff has failed to notify the Court of a current address.

In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; and

Further, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Local Rule 183(b).

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)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is 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).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Rodriguez v. Scnumman
(Feb 1, 2022)