Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-02440/USCOURTS-cand-5_05-cv-02440-0/pdf.json

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

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Plaintiff had indicated that he was located at the California Training Facility in

Soledad, California. The returned mail indicated that plaintiff had been released on

parole.

Order of Dismissal

G:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.05\Lara02440_311dismissal.wpd

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOSE LARA,

Plaintiff(s),

 vs.

MICHAEL FRIEDMAN, et al.,

Defendant(s).

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C 05-02440 JW (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL;

DENYING MOTION FOR

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(Docket No. 14)

On June 6, 2006, the Court ordered service of the complaint upon defendants. 

On June 15, 2006, the order was returned to the Court as undeliverable because

plaintiff was not at the address he had provided to the Court in his complaint, the last

address he has provided to the Court.1

 Since that time, on August 23, 2006, and

June 15, 2007, further orders of the Court have also been returned to the Court as

undeliverable. To date, the Court has received no indication from plaintiff as to his

correct current address. Civil Local Rule 3-11 provides for the dismissal of an

Case 5:05-cv-02440-JW Document 21 Filed 09/25/07 Page 1 of 2
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

Order of Dismissal

G:\PRO-SE\SJ.JW\CR.05\Lara02440_311dismissal.wpd 2

action in which a pro se plaintiff fails to notify the Court of a change of address

within 60 days of the date mail is returned to the Court as not deliverable. As more

than a year has passed since the first order to plaintiff was returned, and two other

orders have since been returned as undeliverable well over 60 days ago, and plaintiff

has not notified the Court of his correct current address, this action is hereby

DISMISSED. 

In light of this dismissal, defendants’ motion for summary judgment is

DENIED as moot. 

The clerk shall close the file and terminate Docket No. 14 and any other

outstanding motions.

DATED: 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge 

September 21, 2007

Case 5:05-cv-02440-JW Document 21 Filed 09/25/07 Page 2 of 2