Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01271/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01271-3/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

TERRY JONES,

Plaintiff,

v.

PINA, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-01271 GSA (PC)

ORDER AND FINDINGS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS

ORDER RECOMMENDING MATTER BE 

DISMISSED FOR FAILURE TO FILE 

NOTICE OF CURRENT ADDRESS WITH 

COURT

PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS DUE IN 

FOURTEEN DAYS

Plaintiff, who appears to be a former state prisoner1proceeding pro se and in forma 

pauperis, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was 

referred to a United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 

302.

On June 17, 2024, an order issued by the Court and served on Plaintiff was returned to the 

Court marked “Undeliverable, Insufficient Address.” Since then, more than sixty-three days 

have passed and Plaintiff has not filed a notice of change of address with the Court. See Local 

Rule 183(b).

1

 The Court takes judicial notice of the fact that on November 29, 2023, Plaintiff’s notice of 

change of address was docketed. ECF No. 11. The address on the document appears to be a 

residential address. See id.

Case 1:23-cv-01271-KES-GSA Document 17 Filed 09/30/24 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

Although Plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, he was properly served. It is a 

plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the Court apprised of his current address at all times. See Local 

Rule 183(b). Moreover, pursuant to Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the record 

address of the party is fully effective.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall randomly assign a 

District Judge to this matter.

IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without prejudice for 

failure to file a notice of current address with the Court.

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, Plaintiff may file written objections 

with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings 

and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within the specified 

time waives the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th 

Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 28, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-01271-KES-GSA Document 17 Filed 09/30/24 Page 2 of 2