1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 MICHAEL R. MULLINS, No. 2:23-cv-01832-DB 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 TEHAMA COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT, et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 On March 21, 2024, documents were mailed to plaintiff for service. (ECF No. 5.) The 18 documents were returned to the court on April 12, 2024 as undeliverable. Seventy-three days 19 have passed since the mail was returned and plaintiff has not submitted an updated address. It is 20 the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. 21 Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully 22 effective. 23 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the Clerk of Court assign a district judge at random. 24 IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice. See 25 Local Rule 110; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 26 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 27 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

(b)(l). Within fourteen after 28 1 | being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections with 2 | the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and 3 | Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified time 4 || waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,

(9th Cir. 5 | 1991). 6 | Dated: June 24, 2024 7 8 9 ORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 DB16 18 19 DB/Prisoner Inbox/Civil Rights/casil160.fta.nca

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28