Opinion
C21-1335 BHS
10-28-2024
CHRISTOPHER WILLIAM HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. JOSE PEREZ, Defendant.
ORDER
BENJAMIN H. SETTLE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS MATTER is before the Court on pro se plaintiff Christopher Harris's “request to expedite,” Dkt. 158, and on the Court's own motion following Harris's failure to respond to its July 16, Order requiring the parties to file a Joint status Report by September 30, 2024. Dkt. 145.
As Harris's recent filing concedes, he has moved frequently over the past several months. See Dkt. 158 at 1-2. Harris has filed Notices of Change of Address at Dkts. 126, 131, 140, 147, and 157.
Despite these efforts (and despite his claim that he has called the Court to inquire about the case), much of the Court's correspondence with Harris has been returned as undeliverable. Dkts. 136, 139, 148, 150, 152, 154, and 155. This includes the Court's Order, Dkt. 145, granting Harris's former counsel's motion to withdraw and requiring the parties to file a joint status report by August 30. Harris did not participate in the filing of that Report. Dkt. 151. Nor did Harris respond to the Court's Minute Order, Dkt. 153, requiring the parties to inform the Court by September 18 whether they agreed to have this case heard in Tacoma. Perez did so respond, Dkt. 156.
Harris now asks the Court to “expedite” the case, and to hold a trial before the “busy holidays.” Dkt. 158 at 7. That motion is DENIED.
Harris shall contact defendant Perez's counsel and participate in preparing and filing a JOINT STATUS REPORT addressing the topics outlined in Dkts. 141 and 153, the status of discovery and other trial preparations, available trial dates, and trial length, within 14 days.
Harris shall promptly inform the Court in writing of his current address, and of any change in that address going forward. The failure to timely file a Joint Status Report, or the failure to keep the Court and the defendant apprised of his current address, will result in the dismissal of this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.