Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 2, 2025

Stoddard v. The USC Police

Judge
Jacquelyn Corley
Docket
3:24-cv-08269
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Stoddard v. The USC Police, Judge Corley dismissed the case without prejudice because Stoddard did not provide a current mailing address or respond to the Court.

Who this affects

Clinton Harry Stoddard’s civil-rights case against The USC Police was dismissed without prejudice.

What happened

Clinton Harry Stoddard, an inmate representing himself, filed a civil-rights case under a federal law allowing claims against state actors. The defendant was The USC Police.

The Court’s mail to Stoddard was returned as undeliverable, and he did not provide a new address or otherwise contact the Court. After the Court gave him an opportunity to provide a valid address or explain why the case should continue, he did neither.

Judge Jacquelyn Corley dismissed the case without prejudice under the District’s rule requiring parties to report address changes. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment and close the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Stoddard v. The USC Police · No. 3:24-cv-08269
Judge
Jacquelyn Corley
Date
Apr. 2, 2025

Background

Clinton Harry Stoddard, an inmate proceeding without an attorney, filed a civil-rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court mailed several notices and orders to the address Stoddard had provided. The postal service returned the mail as undeliverable, and Stoddard did not provide the Court with a new address.

Opportunity to Respond

The Court ordered Stoddard to provide a current mailing address and any identification number needed to receive mail, or to explain why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice. The order set a February 21, 2025 deadline. That order was also returned as undeliverable. Stoddard did not provide an address or contact the Court.

Ruling

The Court applied Northern District of California Civil Local Rule 3-11. The rule requires a self-represented party whose address changes during a case to promptly file a notice of the new address. It permits dismissal without prejudice when court mail is returned as undeliverable and the Court does not receive a written communication providing a current address within 60 days.

Judge Jacquelyn Corley concluded that Stoddard had not complied with the rule and had failed to correct the problem after receiving an opportunity to do so. The case was dismissed without prejudice to refiling in a new case in which Stoddard provides and maintains his correct address. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment and close the file.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.