Opinion
2:23-cv-06445-ODW (DTB)
06-24-2024
DEANDRE DANNY JONTE BARNES, Plaintiff, v. LOS ANGELES SHERIFF DEPARTMENT, et al, Defendants.
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE REGARDING FAILURE TO UPDATE ADDRESS
DAVID T. BRISTOW, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On August 7, 2023, plaintiff filed a Civil Rights Complaint (“Complaint”) herein along with a Request to Proceed Without Prepayment of Filing Fees (“IFP Application”). (Dkt. Nos. 1-2.) On August 28, 2023, the Court postponed the ruling on plaintiff's IFP Application. (Dkt. # 3.) On September 18, 203, plaintiff amended his IFP Application and the Court granted the same on October 17, 2023. (Dkt. Nos. 5-6.) On October 17, 2023, the Court issued its Initial Case Management Order. (Dkt. # 7.) On November 1, 2023, the Court issued its Screening Order. (Dkt. # 8.) The matter was transferred to this Court's calendar on November 22, 2023. (Dkt. # 9.) On December 27, 2023, as plaintiff had not responded to the Court's Screening Order, the Court, sua sponte, extended plaintiff's time within which to do so. (Dkt. # 10.) On January 2, 2024, plaintiff filed Correspondence and a Motion to Preserve My Civil Rights and Waive Complaint. (Dkt. Nos. 11-12.) On January 12, 2024, the Court received its December 27, 2023 Order returned from the institution marked “Released.” (Dkt. # 14.) On January 16, 2024, the Court issued an Order regarding plaintiff's Correspondence and Motion filed on January 2, 2024. (Dkt. # 15.) On January 29, 2024, the Court received its January 16, 2024 Order returned from the institution marked “Released.” (Dkt. # 17.) A review of the Los Angeles County Inmate Locator's website1 revealed that plaintiff was released on January 4, 2024 and was no longer in custody. Therefore, on February 12, 2024, the Court issued an Order re Plaintiff's Mailing Address. (Dkt. # 18.) On February 15, 2024, plaintiff filed a Notice of Change of Address. (Dkt. # 19.) On February 26, 2024, the Court's February 12, 2024 Order re Plaintiff's Mailing Address was returned from the institution marked “Released.” (Dkt. # 20.) On the same day, the Court issued an Order extending plaintiff's time to respond to the Screening Order due to his recent release and the return of mail. (Dkt. # 21.) In March 2024, the Court again received mail (Dkt. Nos. 10, 12, 13, 15 and 21) returned from the United States Postal Service marked as either “Return to Sender Not Deliverable as Addressed” or “Return to Sender Unable to Forward.” (Dkt. Nos. 23-27.) On March 25, 2024, the Court issued an Order directing the Clerk to remove plaintiff's booking number from his address and provide plaintiff with duplicate copies of all documents that have been returned as undeliverable. (Dkt. # 28.) On May 2, 2024, plaintiff a “Motion to Notified” (Dkt. # 30), which the Court construed as a request to update address and which the Court granted on May 6, 2024 updating plaintiff's address and again, sua sponte, extending his time to respond to the Screening Order (Dkt. # 31). On May 24, 2024, plaintiff filed a “Civil Rights Complaint” “Motion Government Tort,” listing multiple case numbers. As such, the Clerk's Office issued a discrepancy notice (Dkt. # 33). On May 30, 2024, the Court issued an Order regarding plaintiff's “Civil Rights Complaint” “Motion Government Tort” advising plaintiff that it appeared to the Court that plaintiff was intending to file a new complaint which the Court struck on May 30, 2024 and again, sua sponte, extended plaintiff's time to respond to the Screening Order. (Dkt. Nos. 32, 34.) On June 17, 2024, the Court received its discrepancy notice returned from the institution marked as “Return to Sender Not Deliverable as Addressed.” (Dkt. # 35.) A review of the Los Angeles County Inmate Locator's website reveals that plaintiff was released on May 16, 2024 and is no longer in custody.
Pro se litigants are required to keep the Court and opposing parties apprised of their current address. Central District of California Local Rule 41-6. Therefore, plaintiff is ordered to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution and failing to comply with the Court's Local Rules. Plaintiff may alternatively file a Notice of Change of Address to discharge this Order to Show Cause. Plaintiff's response is due no later than July 12, 2024.
Plaintiff is hereby cautioned that failing to comply with this Order may result in the recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the Court's Local Rules.