Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-05607/USCOURTS-cand-3_18-cv-05607-2/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
City and County of San Francisco
Defendant
San Francisco Sheriff's Department
Defendant
David Wilkes
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DAVID WILKES,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAN FRANCISCO SHERIFF'S 

DEPARTMENT, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 18-cv-05607-JD 

ORDER DENYING MOTION

Re: Dkt. No. 8

On September 13, 2018, plaintiff filed a pro se civil rights complaint pursuant to 42 

U.S.C. § 1983. At that time, plaintiff was detained at the San Francisco County Jail at 850 

Bryant Street. Docket No. 1-1 at 1; 1-2 at 1. On November 28, 2018, the complaint was 

dismissed with leave to amend to provide more information. The order was sent to 

plaintiff’s address at 850 Bryant Street. Docket No. 4 at 4. That order also noted that it 

was plaintiff’s responsibility to prosecute this case and keep the Court informed of any 

address change. Docket No. 4 at 3. That order was not returned to the Court as 

undeliverable. On January 14, 2019, the action was dismissed for failure to file an 

amended complaint as plaintiff had failed to file an amended complaint or otherwise 

communicate with the Court. Docket No. 7. That order was also not returned to the Court 

as undeliverable.

On March 11, 2019, plaintiff, now represented by counsel, filed an administrative 

motion to consolidate this matter with a pending class action, Zayas, et al., v. City and 

County of San Francisco, Case No. 18-06155 JCS. Plaintiff asserts that these suits involve 

common issues of law and fact, and he wishes to be represented by counsel in the pending 

class action. Plaintiff has also filed a written consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction. 

Case 3:18-cv-05607-JD Document 10 Filed 04/17/19 Page 1 of 2
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

However, this case is closed. No motion for relief from a judgment has been filed, nor has 

an amended complaint been filed as set forth in the order of dismissal with leave to amend. 

Plaintiff states that he never received the orders from the Court. He contends that at some 

time in September 2018, shortly after filing this case, he was moved from the 850 Bryant 

St. location to a different jail and then was later released from custody. It was plaintiff’s 

responsibility to update the Court as to his change of address and there is no information 

why he failed to update the Court when he moved jails or was released. Plaintiff has filed 

seventeen cases in this Court and is well aware of his responsibility to keep the Court 

updated on his address and that after filing a new complaint the Court will provide a 

response. For all these reasons, plaintiff’s motion to consolidate this closed case (Docket 

No. 8) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 17, 2019

JAMES DONATO

United States District Judge

Case 3:18-cv-05607-JD Document 10 Filed 04/17/19 Page 2 of 2