Opinion
No. 2:19-cv-1841 MCE AC P
02-04-2021
JAMES NELSON, JR., Plaintiff, v. SACRAMENTO COUNTY, et al., Defendants.
FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS
On December 7, 2020, the court received a notice from the Sacramento County Jail stating that plaintiff had been released from custody on November 18, 2020. ECF No. 10. On January 4, 2021, plaintiff was ordered to file a notice of change of address or notify the court that he was still in custody within fourteen days, and was warned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed without prejudice. ECF No. 11. Plaintiff has not responded to that order. Moreover, although it appears from the file that plaintiff's copy of the order was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is the plaintiff's responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.
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: February 4, 2021
/s/_________
ALLISON CLAIRE
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE