Royalay v. USCIS
Royalay v. USCIS
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
MICHELLE CHIOMA ROYALAY, Case No. 2:24-cv-00943-NJK 7 Plaintiff(s), aly. ORDER
USCIS, 10 Defendant(s). 11 Plaintiff has failed to update her address. See Docket No. 8 (mail returned as 12} undeliverable). “A party, not the district court, bears the burden of keeping the court apprised of 13] any changes in his mailing address.” Carey v. King,
856 F.2d 1439, 1441(9th Cir. 1988); see also 14] in re Hammer,
940 F.2d 524, 526(9th Cir. 1991). To that end, the local rules require that litigants 15] immediately file with the Court written notification of any change of address, and expressly warn 16] that failure to do so may result in case-dispositive sanctions. See Local Rule IA 3-1. 17 Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby ORDERED to file a notice of changed address by June 18] 21, 2024. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER MAY RESULT IN DISMISSAL. 19 IT IS SO ORDERED. 20 Dated: May 31, 2024 Ae. 21 7, QE Nancy J. Koppe \, 22 United States Magistrate Judge 23 24 25 26 27 28
Reference
- Status
- Unknown