(PC) James v. County of Sacramento et al, No. 2:2010cv00664 - Document 6 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: ORDER and FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/6/10 ORDERING that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action; RECOMMENDING that this action be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. Referred to Judge Morrison C. England, Jr.; Objections to F&R due within 21 days.(Dillon, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PC) James v. County of Sacramento et al Doc. 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WILLIAM JAMES, 11 12 13 14 Plaintiff, vs. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, et al., Defendants. 15 16 No. CIV S-10-0664 DAD P FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS / Recent court documents were served on plaintiff's address of record and returned 17 by the postal service as undeliverable. It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with Local 18 Rule 182(f), which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any 19 address change. 20 21 22 23 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to randomly assign a United States District Judge to this action. IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 182(f) and 110. 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District 25 Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within twenty- 26 one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 objections with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 2 Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the 3 specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 4 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 5 DATED: April 6, 2010. 6 7 8 9 10 DAD:9:md jame0664.33a 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.
