(PC) Woolery v. Shasta County Jail ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 JACOB DAVID WOOLERY, No. 2:21-cv-00270 AC P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 SHASTA COUNTY JAIL, et al., 15 Defendants. 16 17 On June 16, 2023, plaintiff was ordered to file an amended complaint, and he was given 18 thirty days to do so. ECF No. 11 at 6. Shortly thereafter, on June 27, 2023, the order was 19 returned to the court as “Undeliverable, Return to Sender.” 20 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, plaintiff 21 was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current 22 address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of 23 the party is fully effective. 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to assign a 25 District Judge to this case. 26 IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED without prejudice 27 for failure to prosecute and for failure to obey a court order. See Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 28 41(b). ] These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 2 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).. Within fourteen after 3 || being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with 4 || the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 5 || Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 6 || waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 7 | 1991). 8 | DATED: September 12, 2023. 9 ~ 10 ththienr—Chnp—e_ ALLISON CLAIRE 11 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28