Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01158/USCOURTS-caed-1_23-cv-01158-2/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

KEVIN ROGERS,

Plaintiff,

v.

CALIFORNIA STATE PRISON 

CORCORAN, et al.,

Defendants.

No. 1:23-cv-01158 GSA

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, a state prisoner proceeding 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 August 1, 2024, an order which directed Plaintiff to file a notice of current address 

(ECF No. 7) was returned to the Court marked “Undeliverable, Refused.” Since then, more than 

sixty-three days have passed and Plaintiff has not filed a notice of current address with the Court. 

See Local Rule 183(b).

Although it appears from the file that Plaintiff’s copy of the order was returned, Plaintiff 

was properly served. It is the plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current 

Case 1:23-cv-01158-KES-GSA Document 10 Filed 10/09/24 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

address at all times. 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 after 

being served with these findings and recommendations, Plaintiff may file written objections with 

the Court. Objections should not exceed fifteen pages. 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: October 9, 2024 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:23-cv-01158-KES-GSA Document 10 Filed 10/09/24 Page 2 of 2