(PC) Washington v. Yuba County Superior Courts

United States District Court for the Eastern District of California

(PC) Washington v. Yuba County Superior Courts

Trial Court Opinion

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LAVAR WASHINGTON, No. 2:25-cv-01853 SCR P 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. ORDER AND 14 YUBA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURTS, FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS et al., 15 Defendants. 16

17 18 Plaintiff is a pretrial detainee proceeding pro se with a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. 19 § 1983. Plaintiff initiated the action on February 5, 2025, by filing a complaint in the U.S. 20 District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma. (ECF No. 1.) On July 2, 2025, the action 21 was transferred to this District. (ECF No. 8.) However, on July 16, 2025, the new case 22 documents and consent order served by this Court on plaintiff’s address of record were returned 23 by the postal service. It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 183(b), which 24 requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change. More 25 than thirty days have passed since the court order was returned by the postal service and plaintiff 26 has failed to notify the Court of a current address. 27 Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court is HEREBY ORDERED to randomly assign a district 28 judge to this case. 1 Further, IT IS RECOMMENDED that: 2 1. Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) be DENIED 3 | as moot; and 4 2. This action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Local Rule 5 | 183(b). 6 These findings and recommendations are submitted to the United States District Judge 7 || assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1). Within twenty-one days 8 | after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 9 || with the court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 10 | and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 11 | time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst,

951 F.2d 1153

12 | (9th Cir. 1991). 13 | DATED: August 29, 2025 M4 ond SEAN C. RIORDAN 16 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Reference

Full Case Name
Lavar Washington v. Yuba County Superior Courts, et al.
Status
Unknown