United States District Court, M.D. Alabama, Northern Division
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
WALLACE CAPEL, Jr., Magistrate Judge.
This pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action was filed by Plaintiff on December 19, 2014. At the time he filed this complaint, Plaintiff was incarcerated at the Lowndes County Jail in Hayneville, Alabama.
On January 8, 2015, the court entered an order of procedure directing Defendants to file an answer and written report to Plaintiff's complaint. The January 8 order also instructed Plaintiff to inform the court of any change in his address and cautioned him that his failure to comply with this requirement would result in a Recommendation that this case be dismissed. See Doc. No. 4, ¶ 8(h).
On March 30, 2015, Plaintiff's copy of an order filed March 23, 2015, was returned to the court marked as undeliverable because Plaintiff is no longer housed at the Lowndes County Jail. This is the last known address the court has on file for Plaintiff. Consequently, the court entered an order on March 31, 2015, directing Plaintiff to provide the court with his present address on or before April 10, 2015. Doc. No. 12. Plaintiff was cautioned that his failure to comply with the court's April 10 order would result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. Id. Plaintiff's copy of the court's March 31, 2015, order was returned to the court on April 13, 2015, marked as undeliverable.
As it appears clear that Plaintiff is no longer residing at the most recent address he provided to the court and that he has not provided this court with a new address for service, the undersigned concludes that dismissal of the complaint is appropriate.
Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failures to prosecute this action properly and to comply with the orders of this court.
It is further
ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to file any objections to the said Recommendation on or before April 29, 2015. Any objections filed must specifically identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which the party is objecting. Frivolous, conclusive, or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable.
Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the Magistrate Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District Court of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual findings in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982); see Stein v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982); see also Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) ( en ...