(PC) Tanksley v. Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center et al, No. 2:2017cv00566 - Document 8 (E.D. Cal. 2017)
Court Description: FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 9/25/2017 RECOMMENDING this action be dismissed without prejudice. Referred to Judge John A. Mendez. Objections due within 14 days after being served with these findings and recommendations. (Henshaw, R)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MOODY WOODROW TANKSLEY, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. 2:17-cv-0566 JAM CKD P v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS RIO COSUMNES CORRECTIONAL CENTER, et al., Defendants. 16 17 On August 3, 2017, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed in forma pauperis application 18 19 or pay the filing fee within thirty days and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in 20 dismissal. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s 21 order. Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of court’s August 3, 2017 order was 22 returned to the court by the U.S. Postal Service because plaintiff no longer resides at the address 23 of record, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court 24 apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents 25 at the record address of the party is fully effective. 26 ///// 27 ///// 28 ///// 1 1 2 3 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 4 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 5 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 6 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Findings and 7 Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 8 may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 9 Cir. 1991). 10 Dated: September 25, 2017 _____________________________________ CAROLYN K. DELANEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 11 12 13 14 15 1/bh tank0566.dis 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.
