(PC) Matthews v. Thomas ( 2019 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 DWIGHT MATTHEWS, No. 2:16-cv-2834 WBS AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS 14 S. THOMAS, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 A recent court order was served on plaintiff’s address of record and returned by the postal 18 service. It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 183(b), which requires that 19 a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change. More than sixty- 20 three days have passed since the court order was returned by the postal service and plaintiff has 21 failed to notify the Court of a current address. 22 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 23 prejudice for failure to prosecute. See L.R. 183(b). 24 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 25 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days 26 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 27 with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 28 and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 1 | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 2 | (9th Cir. 1991). 3 | DATED: October 1, 2019 ~ 4 Attten— ALLISON CLAIRE 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28