Opinion
5:15CV00178 BRW/PSH
04-06-2016
JAMES DIXON et al ADC #83733 PLAINTIFFS v. GERALD ROBINSON et al DEFENDANTS
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION
INSTRUCTIONS
The following Proposed Findings and Recommendation have been sent to United States District Judge Billy Roy Wilson. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact.
DISPOSITION
Plaintiffs James Dixon and Richard Butters filed a pro se complaint on June 3, 2015. On February 26, 2016, after mail sent to Dixon at his address of record was returned as undeliverable, the Court entered an order directing Dixon to file a notice of his current address within 30 days, and warned him that his failure to do so would result in the recommended dismissal of his complaint (Doc. No. 36). Because the Arkansas Department of Correction's public website indicated Dixon might have been at the Barbara Ester Unit, the order was sent to plaintiff there, as well as to him at his address of record. The order sent to his address of record was returned as undeliverable (Doc. No. 37), but the same order sent to the Barbara Ester Unit was not returned.
The claims of former plaintiff Jeffery E. Krisell, Sr., have been dismissed (Doc. No. 23). --------
Although more than 30 days have passed, plaintiff has not updated his address or otherwise responded to the order. Under these circumstances, the Court concludes that Dixon's claims should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), and failure respond to the Court's order. See Miller v. Benson, 51 F.3d 166, 168 (8th Cir. 1995) (District courts have inherent power to dismiss sua sponte a case for failure to prosecute, and exercise of that power is reviewed for abuse of discretion).
IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT the claims of plaintiff James Dixon be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), and failure respond to the Court's order.
DATED this 6th day of April, 2016.
/s/_________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE