From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hampton v. Broach

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jul 5, 2022
18-cv-04516-JCS (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 5, 2022)

Opinion

18-cv-04516-JCS (PR)

07-05-2022

KEVIN LAMAR HAMPTON, Plaintiff, v. R. BROACH, Defendant.


ORDER OF DISMISSAL DKT. NO. 38

JOSEPH C. SPERO CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Mail sent by the Court to plaintiff was returned as undeliverable more than 60 days ago. (Dkt. No. 40.) 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 parties have consented to magistrate judge jurisdiction for all purposes under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). (Dkt. Nos. 5 and 16.)

Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution is DENIED as moot. (Dkt. No. 38.)

The Clerk shall terminate all pending motions, enter judgment in favor of defendant, and close the file.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Hampton v. Broach

United States District Court, Northern District of California
Jul 5, 2022
18-cv-04516-JCS (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 5, 2022)
Case details for

Hampton v. Broach

Case Details

Full title:KEVIN LAMAR HAMPTON, Plaintiff, v. R. BROACH, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of California

Date published: Jul 5, 2022

Citations

18-cv-04516-JCS (PR) (N.D. Cal. Jul. 5, 2022)