Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01959/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01959-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DUANE WARREN JACKSON, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

A. AMERO, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. 2:14-cv-1959-MCE-EFB P 

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

 Plaintiff is a state prisoner proceeding without counsel in an action brought under 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. On July 19, 2015, the postal service returned documents directed to plaintiff as 

“undeliverable, paroled.” A party appearing without counsel must keep the court and all parties 

apprised of his current address. L.R. 183(b). If mail directed to a plaintiff is returned by the 

postal service and plaintiff fails to notify the court and opposing parties within 63 days thereafter 

of her current address, the court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. 

Id. More than 63 days have passed since the postal service returned the mail and plaintiff has not 

notified the court of his current address. 

 Accordingly, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed. See Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 41(b); L.R. 110, 183(b). 

 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 

Case 2:14-cv-01959-MCE-EFB Document 19 Filed 08/28/15 Page 1 of 2
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

2

after being served with these findings and recommendations, any party may file written 

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned 

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections 

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v. 

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 

Dated: August 26, 2015. 

Case 2:14-cv-01959-MCE-EFB Document 19 Filed 08/28/15 Page 2 of 2