Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01544/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-01544-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1983 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

ERIC M. SYDNER,

Plaintiff,

v.

JASON SCOTT,

Defendant.

No. 2:14-cv-1544 JAM DAD PS

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was, therefore, referred to the 

undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). On October 

24, 2014, the court served upon plaintiff at his address of record an order granting plaintiff’s 

motion to proceed in forma pauperis and ordering service on the defendant. (Dkt. No. 3.) The 

court’s records reflect that on November 12, 2014, plaintiff’s copy of that order was returned to 

the court by the postal service marked “Undeliverable, RTS – unable to forward.”

It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 182, which requires every 

party, including any party proceeding in propria persona, to notify the court and all other parties 

of any change of address. Local Rule 182(f). “Absent such notice, service of documents at the 

prior address of the attorney or pro se party shall be fully effective.” Id. Failure to comply with 

the court’s rules or with any order of the court may be grounds for imposition by the court of any

/////

Case 2:14-cv-01544-JAM-DAD Document 6 Filed 03/16/15 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

and all sanctions authorized by statute or rule or within the inherent power of the court. Local 

Rule 110.

Good cause appearing, IT IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed without 

prejudice due to plaintiff’s failure to keep the court apprised of his current address and his failure 

to comply with applicable rules and court orders.

These findings and recommendations will be 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 and serve written 

objections with the court. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections to 

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff’s failure to file objections within 

the specified time may, under certain circumstances, waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 

order regarding the findings and recommendations. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 

1991).

Dated: March 13, 2015

DAD:6

Ddad1\orders.pro se\sydner1544.nca.f&rs.docx

Case 2:14-cv-01544-JAM-DAD Document 6 Filed 03/16/15 Page 2 of 2