Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02088/USCOURTS-caed-2_04-cv-02088-9/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

BRIAN HACKETT, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2088 FCD EFB P

vs.

D. KIMBRELL,

Defendant. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

Plaintiff is a prisoner, without counsel, seeking relief for alleged civil rights violations. 

See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On April 16, 2007, the postal service returned an order this court duly

served on plaintiff. No activity has occurred in the case since then.

A party appearing without counsel must keep the court and all parties apprised of his

current address. L.R. 83-183(b). If mail directed to such a plaintiff is returned by the postal

service and plaintiff fails to notify the court and opposing parties within 60 days thereafter of his

current address, the court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. 

More than 60 days have passed since the postal service returned the order and plaintiff

has not notified the court of his current address.

Accordingly, it hereby IS RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed for plaintiff’s

failure to keep the court apprised of his current address. See Local Rules 83-182(d) and 11-110.

Case 2:04-cv-02088-FCD-EFB Document 55 Filed 06/27/07 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

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, any party may file written

objections with the court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Failure to file objections

within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Turner v.

Duncan, 158 F.3d 449, 455 (9th Cir. 1998); Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

DATED: June 27, 2007.

Case 2:04-cv-02088-FCD-EFB Document 55 Filed 06/27/07 Page 2 of 2