(PS)Terrell v. State of California Employment Development Department, No. 2:2009cv03318 - Document 4 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 1/28/10recommending that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and for failure to comply with Local Rule 182(f). REFERRED to Judge Garland E. Burrell, Jr.; objections may be filed within 14 days after being served with these F&R's. (Carlos, K)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS)Terrell v. State of California Employment Development Department Doc. 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 ROBERT TERRELL, 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-3318 GEB DAD PS vs. STATE OF CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Defendant. / By order filed December 3, 2009, plaintiff was granted thirty days to file a new in 18 forma pauperis application that provides all required information. Plaintiff was cautioned that 19 failure to respond to the order in a timely manner may result in a recommendation that this action 20 be dismissed. The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not filed a properly 21 completed in forma pauperis application or responded in any way to the court’s order. 22 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned to 23 the court marked undeliverable, return to sender, not deliverable as addressed, and unable to 24 forward, plaintiff was properly served with the order. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep 25 the court apprised of a current address at all times. Local Rule 182(f). Absent notice of a party’s 26 change of address, service of documents at the party’s address of record is fully effective. Id. 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 2 prejudice for failure to comply with a court order and for failure to comply with Local Rule 3 182(f). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 110. 4 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States 5 District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 6 fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file 7 written objections with the court. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections 8 to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 9 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See 10 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 11 DATED: January 28, 2010. 12 13 14 15 DAD:kw Ddad1\orders.prose\terrell3318.fifp 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.
