(PC) Tracey v. Sacto. Co. Sheriff Dept. Medical Dept., No. 2:2009cv03415 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2010)

Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 09/08/10 recommending that this action be dismissed due to plaintiff's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. Referred to Judge Lawrence K. Karlton. Objections due within 14 days. (Plummer, M)

Download PDF
(PC) Tracey v. Sacto. Co. Sheriff Dept. Medical Dept. Doc. 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID BRUCE TRACEY, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-09-3415 LKK DAD P vs. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT. MEDICAL DEPT., et al., 14 Defendants. 15 FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS / 16 A recent court order was served on plaintiff's address of record and returned by 17 the postal service. It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 182(f), which 18 requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change. 19 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed 20 due to plaintiff's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 182(f) 21 and 110. 22 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 23 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen 24 days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 25 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 26 Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the objections shall be filed and served 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 within fourteen days after service of the objections. Plaintiff is advised that failure to file 2 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. 3 Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 4 DATED: September 8, 2010. 5 6 7 8 9 DAD:kly trac3415.33a 10 11 12 13 14 15 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.