(PC) Brooks v. Arrizola

District Court, E.D. California·Decided December 28, 2022·No. 1:20-cv-00476·Unknown

Opinion

LAMAR BROOKS, Case No. 1:20-cv-0476 JLT GSA (PC) Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, DISMISSING THE v. ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE, AND DIRECTING THE CLERK OF COURT TO ARRIZOLA, et al., CLOSE THIS CASE Defendants. (Doc. 9) Lamar Brooks initiated this action as a state prisoner proceeding pro se by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. §1983. (Doc. 1.) Defendant Arrizola filed a motion for summary judgment, after which the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition within 30 days. (Doc. 37.) However, the Court’s mail was returned as undeliverable. The magistrate judge determined Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s order dated September 16, 2022. (Doc. 40.) Therefore, the magistrate judge recommended the action be dismissed without prejudice. (Id. at 2-3.) The Findings and Recommendations were served on all parties, including Plaintiff at his only address known to the Court, on October 27, 2022. The Findings and Recommendations also contained a notice that any objections were to be filed within 14 days of the date of service. (Id. at 3.) To date, no objections have been filed and the time to do so has expired. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), the Court conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the entire matter, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendations are supported by the record and by proper analysis. Moreover, Plaintiff failed to comply with this Court’s Local Rules, which require him to keep the Court apprised of a curren mailing address, as it has been more than 63 days since the Court’s mail was first returned on October 24, 2022. See Local Rule 183(b). Because no change of address has been provided, dismissal is also appropriate due to Plaintiff's failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the Local Rules. See Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for failure to prosecute and to comply with local rules). Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: 1. The Findings and Recommendations issued on October 27, 2022 (Doc. 40) are adopted in full. 2. The action is DISMISSED without prejudice. 3. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Doc. 36) is terminated as MOOT. 4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. 1g | Dated: _December 27, 2022 Charis [Tourn TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

(PC) Brooks v. Arrizola, (E.D. Cal. 2022).

(PC) Brooks v. Arrizola ((PC) Brooks v. Arrizola) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Henderson v. Duncan
779 F.2d 1421 (Ninth Circuit, 1986)