(PC) Brooks v. Arrizola ( 2022 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LAMAR BROOKS, Case No. 1:20-cv-0476 JLT GSA (PC) 12 Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE 13 v. ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO 14 ARRIZOLA, et al., CLOSE THIS CASE 15 Defendants. (Doc. 9) 16 17 Lamar Brooks initiated this action as a state prisoner proceeding pro se by filing a civil 18 rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §1983. (Doc. 1.) Defendant Arrizola filed a motion for 19 summary judgment, after which the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an opposition or statement of 20 non-opposition within 30 days. (Doc. 37.) However, the Court’s mail was returned as 21 undeliverable. 22 The magistrate judge determined Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s order dated 23 September 16, 2022. (Doc. 40.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the action be 24 dismissed without prejudice. (Id. at 2-3.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on all 25 parties, including Plaintiff at his only address known to the Court, on October 27, 2022. The 26 Findings and Recommendations also contained a notice that any objections were to be filed 27 within 14 days of the date of service. (Id. at 3.) To date, no objections have been filed and the 28 time to do so has expired. 1 In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court conducted a de novo review of this 2 | case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the Findings and 3 || Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Moreover, Plaintiff failed 4 | to comply with this Court’s Local Rules, which require him to keep the Court apprised of a curren 5 | mailing address, as it has been more than 63 days since the Court’s mail was first returned on 6 | October 24, 2022. See Local Rule 183(b). Because no change of address has been provided, 7 | dismissal is also appropriate due to Plaintiff's failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the 8 | Local Rules. See Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for failure 9 | to prosecute and to comply with local rules). 10 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: 11 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on October 27, 2022 (Doc. 40) are 12 adopted in full. 13 2. The action is DISMISSED without prejudice. 14 3. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 36) is terminated as MOOT. 15 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 16 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 1g | Dated: _December 27, 2022 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28