From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rouser v. White

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 27, 2010
No. CIV S-93-0767 LKK GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 27, 2010)

Opinion

No. CIV S-93-0767 LKK GGH P.

July 27, 2010


ORDER


A recent court order was served on intervener David Sims' address of record. On July 23, 2010, Mark A. Radoff, counsel for all interveners but Sims, filed a notice indicating that Sims has been transferred to another prison. It appears that Sims has failed to comply with Local Rule 182(f), which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change.

This notice also indicates that Radoff represents A. McCarter, but that he was accidentally left off the motion to intervene. Technically, therefore, A. McCarter has not been granted intervener status by this court.

For the foregoing reasons, the court orders as follows:

(1) The court DISMISSES Sims from this action for his failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 182(f) and 110.
(2) The court MODIFIES its order granting the motion to intervene, ECF No. 519, to include A. McCarter as an intervener.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Rouser v. White

United States District Court, E.D. California
Jul 27, 2010
No. CIV S-93-0767 LKK GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 27, 2010)
Case details for

Rouser v. White

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM ROUSER, Plaintiff, v. THEO WHITE, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California

Date published: Jul 27, 2010

Citations

No. CIV S-93-0767 LKK GGH P (E.D. Cal. Jul. 27, 2010)