Wesley Yielding, et al. v. United States of America, et al.

8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESLEY YIELDING, et al., No. 2:25-cv-02643-TLN-CKD (PS) 12 Plaintiffs, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., 15 Defendants.

17 The three plaintiffs in this action are proceeding pro se. A recent court order was served on each plaintiff’s address of record and returned by the postal service. It appears that plaintiffs have failed to comply with Local Rule 182(f), which requires that a party appearing in propria persona inform the court of any address change.

21 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for each plaintiff’s failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 182(f) and 110.

24 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)(l). Within fourteen days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiffs may file written objections with the court. The documents should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiffs are advised that failure to file objections within the specified 1] || time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. YIst, 951 F.2d 1153 | (9th Cir. 1991).

3 || Dated: November 5, 2025 Card Kt | (£4 (g— 4 CAROLYN K.DELANEY 5 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1] 2/yiel2643 .f&rs.address