Case Name: Clarence B. HICKMAN, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF BUTTE; et al., Defendants-Appellees
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2014-12-01
Citations: 586 F. App'x 285
Docket Number: No. 13-17640
Parties: Clarence B. HICKMAN, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF BUTTE; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
Judges: Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 586
Pages: 285–286

Head Matter:
Clarence B. HICKMAN, Sr., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. COUNTY OF BUTTE; et al., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 13-17640.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Submitted Nov. 18, 2014.
Filed Dec. 1, 2014.
Clarence B. Hickman, Sr., Napa, CA, pro se.
Before: LEAVY, FISHER, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.
The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

Opinion:
MEMORANDUM
Clarence B. Hickman, Sr. appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice for Hickman's failure to keep the district court informed of his current address, in violation of a local rule. We review for an abuse of discretion, Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir.1988) (per curiam), and we affirm.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Hickman's action without prejudice where mail addressed to Hickman at the address he provided was returned as undeliverable. See id. at 1440-41 (reviewing dismissal following failure of plaintiff to keep court appraised of current address, as required by local rule, and finding no abuse of discretion).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.