Kerry Dawson v. Watanathia et al, No. 5:2012cv01306 - Document 16 (C.D. Cal. 2013)
Court Description: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE by Judge George H. King for Report and Recommendation 14 . (See document for details.) IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that Judgment be entered dismissing this action without prejudice. (rla)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Kerry Dawson v. Watanathia et al Doc. 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS DOCUMENT WAS SERVED BY FIRST CLASS MAIL. POSTAGE PREPAID. TO M:l GQWPI&W2i'1'"\ (OR PARTIES} AT THEIR RESPECTIVE MOST RECENT ADDRESS OF RECORD IN THIS ACTION ON THIS DATE. MAR 2 7 2013 OAT~~ DEPUIYCL R 7 8 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 KERRY DAWSON aka LARRY LEE JACKS, vs. Plaintiff, DEPUTY WATANATHIA, et al., Case No. EDCV 12-1306-GHK (RNB) ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Defendants. 17 On February 26, 2013, the assigned Magistrate Judge issued a Report and 18 Recommendation herein, recommending the dismissal ofthis prose civil rights action 19 without prejudice for failure to prosecute after plaintiff failed to respond to the 20 Magistrate Judge's order to either return the service package to the United States 21 Marshal or show cause in writing why this case should not be dismissed for failure 22 to prosecute. Although a copy of the Report and Recommendation was mailed to 23 plaintiff at his address of record on February 27, 2013, the copy was then returned 24 undelivered with the box for "Out of Custody" checked off and the stamped notation, 25 "Return to Sender/Not Deliverable as Addressed/Unable to Forward." 26 Under Central District of California Local Rule 41-5, it was incumbent on 27 plaintiff to keep the Court apprised of his current address. The rule further provides 28 that, "[i]f mail directed by the Clerk to a pro se plaintiffs address of record is 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 returned undelivered by the Postal Service, and if, within fifteen (15) days of the 2 service date, such plaintiff fails to notify, in writing, the Court and opposing parties 3 of said plaintiff's current address, the Court may dismiss the action with or without 4 prejudice for want of prosecution." 5 Here, more than fifteen ( 15) days have elapsed since the service of the Report 6 and Recommendation, and no notice of change of address has been filed by plaintiff. 7 Moreover, based on its review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 of all the records and files 8 herein, including the Report and Recommendation, the Court concurs with and 9 accepts the Magistrate Judge'sfindings and recommendation. 10 11 IT THEREFORE IS ORDERED that Judgment be entered dismissing this action without prejudice. 12 13 14 DATED: ~;3----~-(v-"'-Y....:..___._J._(/,_____,.?£____ I I 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
