(PC) Shealy v. Bubak

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ELIZABETH MARIE SHEALY, No. 2:24-cv-2310 CSK P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS BUBAK, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 By an order filed August 30, 2024, plaintiff was ordered to file a completed in forma pauperis application on the proper form bearing her signature and was cautioned that failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed. The thirty day period has now expired, and plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s order and has not filed the required document.

22 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 her current address at all times. Pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record address of the party is fully effective.

26 In accordance with the above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to assign a district judge to this case; and /// ] IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice.

2 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)(1). Within fourteen days || after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff 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.” Plaintiff is 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).

10 Dated: October 9, 2024 4 aA Aan Spe | CHI SOO KIM V2 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE || /1/shea2310.fifp