Charles Cooper v. Los Angeles Police Department

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 WESTERN DIVISION CHARLES COOPER, ) No. CV 21-4129-FMO (AGR) ) 12 Plaintiff, ) ) 13 v. ) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ) ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED LOS ANGELES POLICE ) WITHOUT PREJUDICE DEPARTMENT, et al., ) 15 ) Defendants. ) 16 ) ) Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed a civil rights complaint on May 14, 2021. (Dkt. No. 1.) On May 19, 2021, the court issued a Notice of Judge Assignment and Reference to a United States Magistrate Judge. (Dkt. No. 4.) The mail was returned as undeliverable by the postal service and filed on June 2, 2021. (Dkt.

No. 6.)

Local Rule 41-6 requires that a Plaintiff proceeding pro se must keep the Court apprised of the Plaintiff’s current address. In addition, Local Rule 41-6 provides that “the Court may dismiss the action with or without prejudice for want of prosecution” if the Plaintiff fails to notify the Court in writing of Plaintiff’s current address within 15 days after mail is returned as undeliverable by the Postal Service.

Plaintiff has failed to notify the court in writing of Plaintiff’s current address within 1 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that, on or before November 8, 2027, Plaintiff shall 2|| show good cause, if there be any, why this action should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and/or failure to comply with a court order. Filing a 4| Notice of Current Address or other Response on or before November 8, 20271, 5|| shall be deemed compliance with this Order to Show Cause.

6 If Plaintiff does not timely file a Notice of Current Address or otherwise respond to this Order to Show Cause by November 8, 2021, this action is subject 8| to dismissal without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute and/or failure to 9|| comply with a court order. See Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962). "2 Whine AU Kenda, DATED: October 19, 2021 14 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE