Opinion
C/A No.: 1:18-3007-RBH-SVH
02-22-2019
La'Quan D. Bryan, Petitioner, v. Charles Williams, Respondent.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
La'Quan D. Bryan ("Petitioner"), proceeding pro se, filed this petition for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. action alleging violations of his civil rights. All pretrial proceedings in this case were referred to the undersigned pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civ. Rule 73.02(B)(2)(c) (D.S.C.). On December 5 and 7, 2018, the undersigned issued orders directing Plaintiff to bring this matter into proper form and relating to service. [ECF Nos. 11, 17]. The orders were mailed to Petitioner's address of record at McCormick Correctional Institution ("MCI"). [ECF Nos. 12, 18]. On January 24, 2019, counsel for Respondent noted Petitioner had been transferred from MCI and then housed at Lee Correctional Institution ("LCI"). [ECF No. 21-7]. Petitioner was previously ordered to keep the court apprised of any change in his address:
You are ordered to always keep the Clerk of Court advised in writing (United States District Court, 901 Richland Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201) if your address changes for any reason, so as to assure that orders or other matters that specify
deadlines for you to meet will be received by you. If as a result of your failure to comply with this order, you fail to meet a deadline set by this court, your case may be dismissed for violating this order. Therefore, if you have a change of address before this case is ended, you must comply with this order by immediately advising the Clerk of Court in writing of such change of address and providing the court with the docket number of all pending cases you have filed with this court. Your failure to do so will not be excused by the court.[ECF No. 5 at 2]. Petitioner has not notified the court of any change of address.
The court's December 7, 2018 order was returned to the Clerk's office on February 19, 2019, and the December 5, 2018 order was returned on February 22, 2019. [ECF Nos. 25, 26]. Both the returned envelopes are marked "Return to Sender" and "Unclaimed." Id. Although the envelopes were originally sent to MCI, the envelopes reflect they were forwarded to both Perry Correctional Institution ("PCI") and LCI, where it appears Petitioner is currently housed. Petitioner has never advised the court of any change in address.
A search of the South Carolina Department of Corrections inmate locator reveals that Petitioner was first transferred to PCI, but is now housed at LCI. See https://public.doc.state.sc.us/scdc-public/ (last visited February 22, 2019).
As a result of Petitioner's failure to keep the court apprised of his address or claim his mail, neither the court nor Respondent have any means of contacting him concerning his case. It appears to the court that he does not oppose Respondent's motion for summary judgment and wishes to abandon this action. Based on the foregoing, the undersigned recommends this action be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Davis v. Williams, 588 F.2d 69, 70 (4th Cir. 1978); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Clerk is directed to send this Report and Recommendation to Petitioner at LCI. If Petitioner notifies the court within the time set for filing objections to this Report and Recommendation that he wishes to continue with this case and provides a current address, the Clerk is directed to vacate this Report and Recommendation and return the file to the undersigned for further handling. If, however, no objections are filed, the Clerk shall forward this Report and Recommendation to the district judge for disposition.
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED. February 22, 2019
Columbia, South Carolina
/s/
Shiva V. Hodges
United States Magistrate Judge
The parties are directed to note the important information in the attached
"Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation."
Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation
The parties are advised that they may file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation with the District Judge. Objections must specifically identify the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made and the basis for such objections. "[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must 'only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'" Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's note).
Specific written objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), (d). Filing by mail pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 may be accomplished by mailing objections to:
Robin L. Blume, Clerk
United States District Court
901 Richland Street
Columbia, South Carolina 29201
Failure to timely file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation will result in waiver of the right to appeal from a judgment of the District Court based upon such Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).