(PS) Robinson v. Placer County

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ELLEN ROSE ROBINSON, et al., Case No. 2:21-cv-02037-TLN-JDP (PS) 12 Plaintiffs, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 13 v. RESPONSE DUE WITHIN 14 DAYS PLACER COUNTY, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 Three of the plaintiffs in this case, E.M.B., J.P.R, and B.M.F., are minors. Minors may not proceed without counsel and failure to obtain counsel is grounds for dismissal. Johns v. Cty. of San Diego, 114 F.3d 874, 877 (9th Cir. 1997). Thus, the minor plaintiffs will be dismissed if counsel is not obtained.

21 Further, on February 22, 2022, the court received a notification that a mailing for the plaintiffs had been returned as undeliverable.

23 Plaintiffs are required to keep the court apprised of their current addresses. Local Rule 183(b) provides that “[i]f mail directed to a plaintiff in propria persona by the Clerk is returned by the U.S. Postal Service, and if such plaintiff fails to notify the Court and opposing parties within sixty-three (63) days thereafter of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute.” Plaintiffs’ address changes were due by May 2, 2022, | but they failed to file, and they have not otherwise been in contact with the court. Additionally, | two subsequent court mailings have been returned as undeliverable.

3 Accordingly, I hereby order that: 4 1. within fourteen days from the date of entry of this order 5 a. plaintiffs show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to 6 prosecute, and 7 b. minor plaintiffs obtain counsel to file an appropriate response to this order if 8 they wish to proceed in this case; and 9 2. failure to comply with this order will result in dismissal of this case.

Wl IT IS SO ORDERED.

12 ( ie — Dated: _ May 9, 2022 13 JEREMY D. PETERSON 4 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE