(PS) Smith v. Sacramento Court, No. 2:2010cv01618 - Document 6 (E.D. Cal. 2010)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS, recommending that action be dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to keep Court apprised of current address and failure to comply with applicable rules and Court Orders, signed by Magistrate Judge Dale A. Drozd on 7/19/2010. Within 21 days after being served with these F/Rs, plaintiff may file and serve written Objections with Court. (Marciel, M)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
(PS) Smith v. Sacramento Court Doc. 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 KENNETH SMITH, 11 12 13 Plaintiff, No. CIV S-10-1618 JAM DAD PS v. SACRAMENTO COURT DIVISION 720 9TH ST. MAGISTRATE JUDGE, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 Defendant. 15 16 / On June 25, 2010, plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint 17 against the Sacramento County Superior Court. Although the complaint was filed on the form to 18 be used by a prisoner in filing a complaint under the Civil Rights Act, plaintiff indicates on his in 19 forma pauperis application that he is not incarcerated. On June 25, 2010, the Clerk of the Court 20 served upon plaintiff at his address of record a set of new case documents, including an order 21 requiring plaintiff to complete and return within 30 days a form re consent or request for 22 reassignment. (Doc. No. 3.) The court’s records reflect that on July 13, 2010, the documents 23 were returned to the court by the postal service marked “undeliverable, unable to forward.” 24 It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 182, which requires 25 every party, including any party proceeding in propria persona, to notify the court and all other 26 parties of any change of address. Local Rule 182(f). “Absent such notice, service of documents 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 at the prior address of the attorney or pro se party shall be fully effective.” Id. Failure to comply 2 with the court’s rules or with any order of the court may be grounds for imposition by the court 3 of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or rule or within the inherent power of the court. 4 Local Rule 110. 5 Good cause appearing, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed 6 without prejudice due to plaintiff’s failure to keep the court apprised of his current address and 7 his failure to comply with applicable rules and court orders. 8 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States 9 District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 10 twenty-one days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file 11 and serve written objections with the court. A document containing objections should be titled 12 “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff’s failure to file 13 objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order 14 regarding the findings and recommendations. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 15 1991). 16 DATED: July 19, 2010. 17 18 19 20 DAD:kw ddad1\orders.prose\smith1618.nca.f&r 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.
