UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 2:25-cv-9285-SRM-AJR Date: November 14, 2025 Page 1 of 3

Title: Delvontay Lavender v. Correctional Officer Amaya, et al.

DOCKET ENTRY: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THIS ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO UPDATE ADDRESS OF RECORD

PRESENT:

HONORABLE A. JOEL RICHLIN, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

_ Claudia Garcia-Marquez_ _______None_______ __None__ Deputy Clerk Court Reporter/Recorder Tape No.

ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR PLAINTIFF: ATTORNEYS PRESENT FOR DEFENDANTS:

None Present None Present

PROCEEDINGS: (IN CHAMBERS)

On September 16, 2025, pro se Plaintiff Delvontay Lavender (the “Plaintiff”), then a state inmate in the custody of the California State Prison Lancaster (“CSP Lancaster”), filed a civil rights action under

(the “Complaint”). On October 9, 2025, the Clerk’s Office issued a standard Notice of Assignment notifying Plaintiff of the District Judge and Magistrate Judge who were assigned to the case. (Dkt. 3.)

On November 4, 2025, the Notice of Assignment, which had been mailed to Plaintiff’s address of record at CSP Lancaster, P.O. Box 4670, Los Angeles, CA 93539, was returned by the Postal Service as undeliverable. (Dkt. 5.) The returned envelope bore the stamped notation “Return to Sender Inmate Paroled.” (Id.) The Court has checked the CDCR Inmate Locator website and the website does not reflect any inmate under Plaintiff’s name or CDCR number (BA6108).1

1 See https://ciris.mt.cdcr.ca.gov/search (last checked 11/13/2025). UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 2:25-cv-9285-SRM-AJR Date: November 14, 2025 Page 2 of 3

Title: Delvontay Lavender v. Correctional Officer Amaya, et al.

Plaintiff is advised that pursuant to the Central District’s Local Rules, parties proceeding pro se must maintain a current address of record. Local Rule 11-3.8 requires the first page of all documents filed with the Court to contain the address “of the attorney or a party appearing pro se presenting the document.” C.D. Cal. L.R. 11-3.8. Local Rule 41-6 also requires a party proceeding pro se to keep the Court and all other parties informed of the party’s current address: A party proceeding pro se must keep the Court and all other parties informed of the party’s current address as well as any telephone number and email address. If a Court order or other mail served on a pro se [petitioner] at his address of record is returned by the Postal Service as undeliverable and the pro se party has not filed a notice of change of address within 14 days of the service date of the order or other Court document, the Court may dismiss the action with or without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

C.D. Cal. L.R. 41-6 (emphasis added).

Moreover, the Ninth Circuit has made clear that “[a] party, not the district court, bears the burden of keeping the court apprised of any changes in his mailing address,” and that dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) is proper when a pro se litigant fails to do so. Carey v. King,

(9th Cir. 1988).

The Court must have a current address of record for all parties to ensure proper service and receipt of filings. Plaintiff is therefore ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE by November 28, 2025, why the Court should not recommend that this action be dismissed either with or without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 41-6 for failure to provide an updated mailing address. Plaintiff may satisfy this Order by filing a response with a current mailing address.

Further, because it appears Plaintiff has been paroled, the Court advises that if Plaintiff no longer wishes to pursue this action, he may voluntarily dismiss the entire action by filing a Notice of Dismissal in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1). A form Notice of Dismissal is attached for Plaintiff’s convenience. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES – GENERAL

Case No. 2:25-cv-9285-SRM-AJR Date: November 14, 2025 Page 3 of 3

Title: Delvontay Lavender v. Correctional Officer Amaya, et al.

The Court will mail this Order to Plaintiff at his current address of record because that is the only address the Court has. Unless Plaintiff files a notice updating his address, the Court has no way to communicate with Plaintiff or ensure that he receives the Court’s orders. Plaintiff is expressly warned that failure to timely file a response to this Order to Show Cause will result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed either with or without prejudice for failure to prosecute and obey court orders pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Attachment: CV-09, Notice of Dismissal Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(a) or (c).