ORDER OF DISMISSAL

(Docket No. 2)

EDWARD J. DAVILA, District Judge.

On February 19, 2019, Petitioner, a California state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his state conviction along with a motion for leave to proceed In Forma Pauperis ("IFP"). (Docket Nos. 1, 2.) The Court denied IFP status on July 9, 2019, and directed Petitioner to pay the filing fee. (Docket No. 7.)

On July 29, 2019, a copy of the Order Denying Motion to Appoint Counsel was sent to Petitioner. (Docket No. 10.) On October 15, 2019, the mail sent to Petitioner was returned to the Court as undeliverable because Petitioner was "out to medical." (Docket No. 12.) To date, Petitioner has not provided the Court with a new address and has had no further communication with the Court.

Pursuant to Northern District Local Rule 3-11, a party proceeding pro se must promptly file a notice of change of address while an action is pending. See L.R. 3-11(a). The Court may, without prejudice, dismiss a complaint when: (1) mail directed to the pro se party by the Court has been returned to the Court as not deliverable, and (2) the Court fails to receive within sixty days of this return a written communication from the pro se party indicating a current address. See L.R. 3-11(b).

More than sixty days have passed since the mail addressed to Petitioner was returned as undeliverable. The Court has not received a notice from Petitioner regarding a new address. Accordingly, the instant civil rights action is subject to dismissal pursuant to Rule 3-11 of the Northern District Local Rules.

To date, Petitioner has also failed to pay the filing fee. See supra at 1. Accordingly, the case may also be dismissed for failure to pay the filing fee in the time provided.

Based on the foregoing this action is DISMISSED without prejudice.

The Clerk shall terminate any pending motions.

IT IS SO ORDERED.