Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01525/USCOURTS-caed-1_21-cv-01525-2/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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JHONATHAN FRYE,

Plaintiff,

v.

PFIEFER, Warden, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: 1:21-cv-01525-NODJ-SKO (PC)

ORDER VACATING FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO DISMISS

ACTION FOR PLAINTIFF’S FAILURE

TO OBEY COURT ORDERS AND

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

(Doc. 13)

ORDER DIRECTING CLERK OF THE 

COURT TO CHANGE PLAINTIFF’S 

ADDRESS

Plaintiff Jhonathan Frye is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights 

action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

I. INTRODUCTION

On October 27, 2023, this Court issued its Second Screening Order. (Doc. 11.) The Court 

found Plaintiff’s first amended complaint stated an Eighth Amendment threat to safety claim 

against Defendant Rodriguez and First Amendment retaliation claims against Defendants 

Vasquez and Rodriguez, but failed to state a cognizable claim against any other named defendant. 

(Id. at 3-8.) Plaintiff was directed to elect of one three options within 21 days of the date of 

service of the order: (1) notify the Court he did not wish to file a second amended complaint and 

was willing to proceed only on his Eighth Amendment claim of a threat to safety against 

Case 1:21-cv-01525-KES-SKO Document 16 Filed 12/26/23 Page 1 of 3
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

Defendant Rodriguez, and his First Amendment retaliation claims against Defendants Vasquez 

and Rodriguez, the remaining claims to be dismissed; or (2) file a second amended complaint 

curing the deficiencies identified in the screening order; or (3) file a notice of voluntary dismissal. 

(Id. at 8-9.) 

On November 28, 2023, when more than 21 days passed without a response from 

Plaintiff, the Court issued Findings and Recommendations to dismiss this action for Plaintiff’s 

failure to obey court orders and failure to prosecute. (Doc. 13.) Any objections were to be filed 

within 14 days. (Id. at 4.)

On December 21, 2023, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint. (Doc. 15.) On the 

last page of this filing, Plaintiff advises the Court he has paroled and provides a new address:

“448 N. Lynora St., Tulare, CA 93274.” (Id. at 6.) 

II. DISCUSSION

Plaintiff has paroled from California State Prison, Sacramento. Although Plaintiff does 

not indicate the date when he was paroled, the Court finds it unlikely Plaintiff received the 

Findings and Recommendations issued November 28, 2023. Therefore, the Court will vacate the 

Findings and Recommendations to dismiss this action. 

Although he was directed to file a second amended complaint within 21 days of the 

October 27, 2023 second screening order, Plaintiff filed his second amended complaint on 

December 21, 2023. Plaintiff states he received the Court’s second screening order on December 

14, 2023, from the parole office. (Doc. 15 at 6.) The Court will accept the second amended 

complaint even though it was filed after the imposed deadline. Plaintiff is advised his second 

amended complaint will be screened, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a), in due course.

Finally, the Court notes Plaintiff’s address has changed following his parole. The Court 

will direct the Clerk of the Court to change Plaintiff’s address to 448 N. Lynora Street in Tulare, 

California. Plaintiff is advised that any future change of address must be reported on the Notice of 

Change of Address form previously provided with the First Informational Order In Prisoner/Civil 

Detainee Civil Rights Case. (See Doc. 2 at 7 [issued 10/15/21].) 

//

Case 1:21-cv-01525-KES-SKO Document 16 Filed 12/26/23 Page 2 of 3
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

3

III. CONCLUSION AND ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Findings and Recommendations to Dismiss Action for Plaintiff’s Failure to Obey 

Court Orders and Failure to Prosecute (Doc. 13) are VACATED; and

2. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to change Plaintiff’s address to 448 N. Lynora 

Street, Tulare, CA 93274.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 26, 2023 /s/ Sheila K. Oberto .

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:21-cv-01525-KES-SKO Document 16 Filed 12/26/23 Page 3 of 3