Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California recommends dismissing Marquise Louis Drumwright’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice. The recommendation is based on the plaintiff’s failure to keep the Court apprised of his current address, comply with applicable Local Rules, and prosecute the action after court mail was returned as undeliverable.
Holdings
- A pro se plaintiff's failure to notify the Court of a changed address, after mail is returned as undeliverable and the plaintiff fails to respond within the period required by the Local Rules, may warrant dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court rules.
- The five factors governing dismissal for failure to prosecute weighed sufficiently in favor of dismissal without prejudice.
Questions Presented
- Whether the action should be dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to keep the Court and opposing parties apprised of his current address.
- Whether dismissal without prejudice was warranted under the five-factor Ninth Circuit test for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court rules.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (9)
- Thompson v. Housing Auth., City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-62 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130-31 (9th Cir. 1987)(followed)
- Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
- Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988)(followed)
- In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Products Liability Litigation, 460 F.3d 1217, 1226, 1228 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
- Anderson v. Air W., 542 F.2d 522, 524 (9th Cir. 1976)(followed)
- Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 643 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
- Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 839 (9th Cir. 2014)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…