Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01988/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01988-3/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SABINA SANCHEZ,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1988 GEB DAD P

vs.

SHARON DENNY, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

A recent court order served on plaintiff at her address of record was returned by

the postal service as undeliverable. The envelope was marked “Return to Sender - Not In

Custody.” It appears that plaintiff has failed to comply with the Local Rules of Practice, which

require that each attorney and each party appearing in propria persona inform the court promptly

of any change of address. See Local Rule 83-182(f). Absent a notice of change of address,

service of documents at the prior address of the party shall be fully effective. See id.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be

dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to keep the court apprised of her current address. See Local

Rules 83-182(f) and 11-110.

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

Case 2:05-cv-01988-GEB-DAD Document 10 Filed 11/21/05 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

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

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

Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is 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: November 21, 2005.

DAD:13:bb

sanc1988.33a

Case 2:05-cv-01988-GEB-DAD Document 10 Filed 11/21/05 Page 2 of 2