Opinion
2:21-cv-5806-JLS (MAR)
01-04-2022
Santana Helasandros v. County of Santa Barbara, et al.
CIVIL MINUTES - GENERAL
MARGO A. ROCCONI, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Proceedings: (In Chambers) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION AND FAILURE TO PROVIDE CURRENT ADDRESS
On June 14, 2021, Santana Hellasandros (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis (“IFP”), constructively filed a Civil Rights Complaint (“Complaint”) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF Docket No. (“Dkt.”) 1. On November 15, 2021, the Court dismissed the Complaint with leave to amend (“ODLA”), granting Plaintiff twenty-one (21) days to file a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). Dkt. 13. The ODLA cautioned Plaintiff that failure to timely file a response to the ODLA “will result” in the dismissal of the Complaint for failure to prosecute. Dkt. 13 at 20. To date, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court's November 15, 2021 ODLA.
Under the “mailbox rule”, when a pro se prisoner gives prison authorities a pleading to mail to the court, the court deems the pleading constructively “filed” on the date it is signed. Roberts v. Marshall, 627 F.3d 768, 770 n.1 (9th Cir. 2010).
It appears likely that Plaintiff has not received a copy of the ODLA because, on November 29, 2021, the copy of the ODLA that the Court mailed to Plaintiff was returned to the Court. Dkt. 14. Plaintiff has not, however, provided this Court with an updated correct mailing address, as required by the Local Rules and the Court's Initial Civil Rights Case Order, Dkt. 11.
Indeed, the Court's Initial Civil Rights Case Order explained that:
If Plaintiff fails to keep the Court informed of a correct mailing address, this case may be dismissed under Local Civil Rule 41-6, which states as follows:
If mail directed by the Clerk to a pro se plaintiff's address of record is returned undelivered by the Postal Service, and if, within fifteen (15) days of the service date, such plaintiff fails to notify, in writing, the Court and opposing parties of his current address, the Court may dismiss the action with or without prejudice for want of prosecution.L.R. 41-6.
Thus, the Court is inclined to issue an Order dismissing the Complaint for failure to prosecute. However, before doing so, the Court will give Plaintiff an opportunity to show cause in writing within twenty-one (21) days of this Order, by January 25, 2022, why this action should not be dismissed under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute and also for failure to keep the Court informed of a correct mailing address pursuant to Local Civil Rule 41-6. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); Local Civil Rule 41-6.
The Court will consider any of the following three (3) options to be an appropriate response to this OSC:
1. Plaintiff shall file a First Amended Complaint that addresses the deficiencies identified in the Court's November 15, 2021 ODLA;
2. Plaintiff shall provide the Court with an explanation as to why he has failed to file a First Amended Complaint; or
3. Plaintiff may voluntarily dismiss the action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a). The Clerk is directed to attach a Notice of Dismissal form for Plaintiff's convenience.
Failure to respond to the Court's Order will result in the dismissal of the action.
IT IS SO ORDERED.