(PC) Andrews v. Parklin

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SOLOMON J. ANDREWS, No. 2:18-cv-2857 CKD P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND DR. PARKLIN, et al., FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 15 Defendants.

17 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a civil rights action pursuant to 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 3, 2020, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. On May 11, 2020, plaintiff was ordered to file an opposition or a statement of non-opposition to the pending motion within thirty days. In the same order, plaintiff was informed that failure to file an opposition would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The thirty-day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the court’s order.

24 Although it appears from the file that plaintiff’s copy of the court’s May 11, 2020 order was returned, plaintiff was properly served. It is 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.

28 ///// wASe 6. EO FOV RWS NES MVOC Ia eerie □□□ ee 1 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court assign a district | court judge to this case.

3 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule | of Civil Procedure 41(b).

5 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)(). Within fourteen days | after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written | objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned | “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Any response to the | objections shall be filed and served within fourteen days after service of the objections. The | parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to | appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

13 | Dated: June 22, 2020 Gh rd f | Gx CAROLYN K DELANEY 15 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 18 andr2857.46fr