Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01021/USCOURTS-caed-2_05-cv-01021-1/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

CASEY HEDRICK,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-05-1021 FCD KJM P

vs.

SHASTA COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER

COLIN McKIBBIN, et al.,

Defendants. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

 /

On May 27, 2005, plaintiff was ordered to file an in forma pauperis affidavit or

pay the appropriate filing fee for this action within thirty days. The order was returned to the

court by the U. S. Postal Service as undeliverable on June 6, 2005. Under Local Rule 83-183,

plaintiff must keep the court and opposing parties apprised of his current address. Because mail

directed to plaintiff was returned by the U.S. Postal Service, and plaintiff failed to notify the

court and opposing parties within sixty days thereafter of his current address, the court will

recommend that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See id.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be dismissed

without prejudice.

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-01021-FCD-KJM Document 9 Filed 10/21/05 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, 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.” Any reply to the objections

shall be served and filed within ten days after service of the objections. The parties are advised

that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District

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

DATED: October 20, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

1/kf

hedr1021.fifp

Case 2:05-cv-01021-FCD-KJM Document 9 Filed 10/21/05 Page 2 of 2