Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01806/USCOURTS-caed-2_07-cv-01806-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

---

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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

HANNAH MACKAY, et al.,

Plaintiffs, No. CIV S-07-1806 GEB DAD PS

vs.

HILLCREST MOBILE HOME FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

PARK, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

By an order filed November 28, 2007, this court determined that only one of the

seven pro se plaintiffs has filed an in forma pauperis application that makes the showing required

by 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiffs were advised that the $350.00 filing fee must be paid in full

unless all plaintiffs demonstrate inability to pay. Six of the plaintiffs were granted fifteen days to

pay the $350.00 filing fee or file a properly completed in forma pauperis application that makes

the showing required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Plaintiffs were cautioned that failure to timely

comply with the order or apply for an extension of time to do so will result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed.

The fifteen-day period has now expired. The filing fee has not been paid, and

plaintiffs Hannah Mackay, Daniel Schoenstein, Lexi Schoenstein, Collin Schoenstein, Elizabeth

Christopher, and Dianne Nelson have not filed properly completed in forma pauperis applications

Case 2:07-cv-01806-GEB-DAD Document 9 Filed 12/21/07 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

2

or applied for an extension of time to do so. Although it appears that the copies of the court’s

November 28, 2007 order sent to five plaintiffs were returned to the court marked “Undeliverable

- Unable to Forward,” all plaintiffs were properly served. Each party proceeding in propria

persona is under a continuing duty to notify the court of any change of address. See Local Rules

83-182(f) & 83-183(b). Absent a notice of change of address, service of documents at the record

address of the party is fully effective. See Local Rule 83-182(f). Thus, it appears that plaintiffs

Hannah Mackay, Daniel Schoenstein, Lexi Schoenstein, Collin Schoenstein, and Elizabeth

Christopher have failed to comply with Local Rules 83-182 and 83-183.

IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that the claims of plaintiffs Hannah Mackay,

Daniel Schoenstein, Lexi Schoenstein, Collin Schoenstein, Elizabeth Christopher, and Dianne

Nelson be dismissed from this action without prejudice and that this action proceed with plaintiff

Ronald Wright as the sole plaintiff.

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 twenty

days after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiffs may file written

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

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiffs are advised that failure to file

objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. See

Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: December 20, 2007.

DAD:kw

Ddad1\orders.pro se\mackay1806.fifp

Case 2:07-cv-01806-GEB-DAD Document 9 Filed 12/21/07 Page 2 of 2