From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brunskill v. Booth

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jul 23, 2024
23-cv-04077-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 23, 2024)

Opinion

23-cv-04077-WHO (PR)

07-23-2024

DYLAN RICHEY BRUNSKILL, Plaintiff, v. MARQUIS BOOTH, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

WILLIAM H. ORRICK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Mail sent by the Court to plaintiff Brunskill was returned as undeliverable more than 60 days ago. (Dkt. No. 14.) Accordingly, this federal civil rights action is DISMISSED (without prejudice) because Brunskill failed to keep the Court apprised of his current address pursuant to Civil Local Rule 3-11(b) and because he failed to prosecute this matter, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). Because this dismissal is without prejudice, Brunskill may move to reopen the action. Any motion to reopen must have the words MOTION TO REOPEN written on the first page.

The Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of defendants, and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Brunskill v. Booth

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jul 23, 2024
23-cv-04077-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 23, 2024)
Case details for

Brunskill v. Booth

Case Details

Full title:DYLAN RICHEY BRUNSKILL, Plaintiff, v. MARQUIS BOOTH, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jul 23, 2024

Citations

23-cv-04077-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 23, 2024)