From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Geyer v. Ferrara

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 14, 2019
No. 2:17-cv-0501 JAM AC P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2019)

Opinion

No. 2:17-cv-0501 JAM AC P

08-14-2019

JONATHAN GEYER, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS A. FERRARA, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS

A recent court order was served on plaintiff's address of record and returned by the postal service. It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 183(b), which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change. More than sixty-three days have passed since the court order was returned by the postal service and plaintiff has failed to notify the Court of a current address.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See L.R. 183(b).

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)(1). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with the court. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendations." Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). DATED: August 14, 2019

/s/_________

ALLISON CLAIRE

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Geyer v. Ferrara

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 14, 2019
No. 2:17-cv-0501 JAM AC P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2019)
Case details for

Geyer v. Ferrara

Case Details

Full title:JONATHAN GEYER, Plaintiff, v. THOMAS A. FERRARA, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Aug 14, 2019

Citations

No. 2:17-cv-0501 JAM AC P (E.D. Cal. Aug. 14, 2019)