Randle v. Contra Costa County

Background

Ramello Darryl Randle filed this civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 while proceeding without an attorney and while he was an inmate at the Contra Costa County Jail. Randle had informed the court that he expected to be released from the jail and would update his address. Mail sent to the jail address in an earlier related proceeding was returned as undeliverable, and Randle did not provide the court with a new address.

In an order dated November 12, 2024, the court directed Randle to notify it of his current valid mailing address by January 6, 2025, or show cause—that is, explain why he should not be required to do so. The order warned that the case could be dismissed under Civil Local Rule 3-11 if he failed to comply. Randle did not provide an address, explain his noncompliance, or otherwise communicate with the court.

Legal basis

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits involuntary dismissal of an action or claim when a plaintiff fails to prosecute the case or comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or a court order. The opinion states that dismissal is appropriate only when the failure to comply is unreasonable. The court found grounds for dismissal because Randle did not comply with the order requiring a current mailing address and did not provide a reasonable explanation.

Ruling

Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley dismissed the case without prejudice under Rule 41(b). The dismissal permits Randle to refile a new case in which he provides and maintains his current mailing address. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment and close the file.