(PS) Balancio v. Solano County Superior Court

Good Law
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaDecember 8, 20202:20-cv-01831California468 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 VINCE BALANCIO, No. 2:20-cv-01831-TLN-CKD PS Plaintiff, v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS SOLANO SUPERIOR COURT, et al., Defendants. 16 Plaintiff proceeds pro se. This case was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. section 636(b). On November 10, 2020, the undersigned denied plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered plaintiff to pay the required filing and administrative fees within fourteen days. (ECF No. 3.) The deadline for plaintiff to pay the required fees passed, and plaintiff never paid. Although it appears that plaintiff’s copy of the November 10, 2020 order was returned, plaintiff was properly served with it. It is plaintiff’s responsibility to keep the court apprised of his current address at all times. Under Local Rule 182(f), service of documents at the party’s record address is fully effective. L.R. 182(f). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 allows a court to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.