District Court, E.D. Washington, 2023

Toycen v. United States District Court

Toycen v. United States District Court
District Court, E.D. Washington · Decided March 2, 2023
Toycen v. United States District Court

Trial Court Opinion

FILED IN THE U.S. DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Mar 02, 2023 4 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON BILLY EDWARD TOYCEN, No. 1:22-cv-3166-MKD 8 Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO LCivR 41(b)(2) 9 v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT and CITY OF YAKIMA MUNICIPAL COURT, 12 Defendants.

13 On December 12, 2022, the Clerk of Court mailed Plaintiff a copy of the Order directing him to show cause why he should be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis in this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to the residential address he had provided. See ECF Nos. 5, 6. This document was returned as undeliverable on December 27, 2022. See ECF No. 7.

18 Local Civil Rule 41(b)(2) requires a pro se litigant to keep the Court and opposing parties advised as to his current mailing address. If mail directed to a pro se plaintiff is returned by the Postal Service, he has sixty (60) days to notify the Court and opposing parties of his current address or the Court may dismiss the action. LCivR 41(b)(2).

3 The Court has an interest in managing its docket and in the prompt resolution of civil matters. See Destfino v. Reiswig, 630 F.3d 952, 959 (9th Cir. 2011) (affirming district court’s inherent power to control its docket); see also Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642-44 (9th Cir. 2002) (discussing factors to consider in dismissing a claim for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order, including the public’s interest in expeditious resolution, the court’s need to manage its docket, and the risk of prejudice to defendants). Plaintiff has failed to keep the Court apprised of his current address.

11 Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 12 1. This action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to LCivR 41(b)(2).

14 2. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal of this Order could not be taken in good faith and would lack any arguable basis in law or fact.

1 IT IS SO ORDERED. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter this Order, enter judgment, provide copies to Plaintiff at his last known address, and CLOSE the file.

4 DATED March 2, 2023.

5 s/Mary K. Dimke MARY K. DIMKE 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.