Opinion
No. 2:15-cv-2239-EFB P
01-07-2016
STACHA SMITH, Plaintiff, v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Defendant.
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Plaintiff is a county inmate proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On September 11, 2015, the court found that plaintiff had failed to include a certified copy of her trust account statement in support of her application to proceed in forma pauperis, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). Accordingly, the court ordered plaintiff to submit a certified copy of the statement within thirty days and warned her that failure to do so may result in this action being dismissed. The time for acting has passed and plaintiff has not paid submitted a certified copy of her trust account statement or otherwise responded to the court's order. /////
Although it appears from the file that plaintiff's copy of the order was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to keep the court apprised of her current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective. --------
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk randomly assign a United States District Judge to this case.
Further, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.
These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Any response to the objections shall be served and filed within fourteen days after service of the objections. The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: January 7, 2016.
/s/_________
EDMUND F. BRENNAN
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE