From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

White v. Barbier Sec.

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jun 26, 2024
22-cv-06025-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jun. 26, 2024)

Opinion

22-cv-06025-WHO (PR)

06-26-2024

TRAVIS TAMU WHITE, Plaintiff, v. BARBIER SECURITY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL

WILLIAM H. ORRICK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Mail sent by the Court to plaintiff was returned as undeliverable more than 60 days ago. (Dkt. No. 21.) Accordingly, this federal civil rights action is DISMISSED (without prejudice) because plaintiff 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, plaintiff 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

White v. Barbier Sec.

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jun 26, 2024
22-cv-06025-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jun. 26, 2024)
Case details for

White v. Barbier Sec.

Case Details

Full title:TRAVIS TAMU WHITE, Plaintiff, v. BARBIER SECURITY, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jun 26, 2024

Citations

22-cv-06025-WHO (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jun. 26, 2024)