ROBERT C. BROOMFIELD, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff Charles Romero, a county jail inmate, filed this civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on April 4, 2013 (Doc. 1). Later that day, the Clerk of Court issued a notice of assignment (Doc. 4). The notice was returned in the mail on April 15 (Doc. 5). Plaintiff has yet to submit a notice of change of address. Rule 83.3(d) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure requires Plaintiff to file a notice of change of address 10 days before the move is effective. Also, Plaintiff was informed in the instructions accompanying the form complaint that he must immediately inform the Clerk of Court of a change of address or face possible dismissal. Plaintiff has not complied with these requirements.
"A party, not the district court, bears the burden of keeping the court apprised of any changes in his mailing address." Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1441 (9th Cir. 1988) ( per curiam ). If the Court were to order Plaintiff to show cause why dismissal was not warranted, the Order "would only find itself taking a round trip through the United States mail." Id.
The Court is similarly not required to hold the matter in abeyance in hopes that an address change will be forthcoming. "It would be absurd to require the district court to hold a case in abeyance indefinitely just because it is unable, through the Plaintiff's own fault, to contact the plaintiff to determine if his reasons for not prosecuting his lawsuit are reasonable or not." Carey , 856 F.2d at 1441. Because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this action, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b), the Court will dismiss the action without prejudice.
IT IS ORDERED that the Complaint and this action are DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed ...