(PC) Slade v. Rio Cosumnes Correctional Center

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA VERNON SLADE, No. 2:20-cv-1346-EFB P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RIO COSUMNES CORRECTIONAL CENTER, Defendant.

Plaintiff is a county jail inmate proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 18 U.S.C. § 1983. On August 3, 2020, the court found that plaintiff had submitted a trust account statement (ECF No. 6), but it has not been certified by a jail official, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2). ECF No. 7.

Accordingly, the court directed plaintiff to submit a certified trust account statement to complete his request for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Id. The court also warned plaintiff that failure to do so would result in this action being dismissed. Id. The time for acting has now passed and plaintiff has not submitted the certified trust account statement or otherwise responded to the court’s order.1 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. wOASe 2 UVM VIER MVOC OPI OF e POY ee 1 Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to randomly assign a United States | District Judge to this case.

3 Further, it is RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

4 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 served and filed 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 11 appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez | v. Vist, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

13 || Dated: September 8, 2020.

14 Dati Sd SNA 15 EDMUND F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE