Opinion
21-cv-02745-EMC
07-26-2021
In Re TYE JHN LE DRE PARKER, Petitioner.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
DOCKET NOS. 6, 9, 10
EDWARD M. CHEN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
On April 21, 2021, mail was sent from the Court to Petitioner at the address he provided to the Court. The mail was returned undelivered on May 6, 2021, bearing a stamp that read in part “return to sender - unable to forward.” Docket No. 6. On May 17, 2021, additional mail was sent to Petitioner and was returned undeliverable on May 24, 2021, bearing a stamp that read “Not In Custody.” Docket No. 9. Petitioner has not provided a more recent address than the address to which the undeliverable mail was sent.
More than sixty days have passed since the mail was returned to the Court undelivered. Petitioner has failed to comply with Local Rule 3-11(a) which requires a party proceeding pro se to “promptly file with the Court and serve upon all opposing parties a Notice of Change of Address specifying the new address” when his address changes. Local Rule 3-11(b) allows the Court to dismiss an action without prejudice when mail directed to a pro se party is returned as not deliverable and the pro se party fails to send written notice of his current address within sixty days of the return of the undelivered mail.
This action is DISMISSED without prejudice because Petitioner failed to keep the Court informed of his address in compliance with Local Rule 3-11(a).
IT IS SO ORDERED.