Estrada v. Federal Reserve Bank

Opinion

* * * MICHAEL ESTRADA, Case No. 2:23-cv-00494-MMD-BNW

Plaintiff, ORDER v. FEDERAL RESERVE BANK, et al., Defendants. Pro se Plaintiff Michael Estrada brings this action against Defendants Federal Reserve Bank and Jerome Powell under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No. 1.) Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) of United States Magistrate Judge Brenda Weksler, recommending that the Court dismiss the case due to Plaintiff’s failure to update his address. (ECF No. 7.) Plaintiff’s objection to the R&R was due June 14, 2023. To date, Plaintiff has not objected to the R&R. For this reason, and as explained below, the Court adopts the R&R in full and dismisses this case without prejudice. Because there was no objection, the Court need not conduct de novo review, and is satisfied that Judge Weksler did not clearly err. See United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1116 (9th Cir. 2003) (“De novo review of the magistrate judges’ findings and recommendations is required if, but only if, one or both parties file objections to the findings and recommendations”) (emphasis in original); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, Advisory Committee Notes (1983) (providing that the Court “need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation”). Judge Weksler previously ordered Plaintiff to update his address by May 24, 2023, because the U.S. Postal Service had been unable to deliver a recent filing in his case. (ECF Nos. 4, 5.) In that order, Judge Weksler also warned Plaintiff that his failure to update his address 1 pro se litigants to keep the Court apprised of their address, or face dismissal). The deadline has passed, and despite receiving adequate warning, Plaintiff has not filed his updated address, requested an extension, or otherwise responded to Judge Weksler’s order or R&R. Accordingly, the Court adopts Judge Weksler’s R&R in full and dismisses the case without prejudice. See Thompson v. Hous. Auth. of City of L.A., 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986); Malone v. U.S. Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987). It is therefore ordered that Judge Weksler’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 7) is accepted and adopted in full. It is further ordered that this case is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close this case. DATED THIS 15!" Day of June 2023. _

MIRANDA M.DU— CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE