Opinion
23-cv-04797-PCP
06-18-2024
IN RE BARNES, Plaintiff,
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
RE: DKT. NO. 6
P. Casey Pitts United States District Judge
On March 12, 2024, the Clerk of the Court sent a Notice to Plaintiff. Dkt. No. 15. This mail was returned undelivered on April 5, 2024, bearing a stamp that read in part “return to sender - insufficient address - unable to forward.” Dkt. No. 16.
The Clerk's Notice was sent to Plaintiff at the address he provided. See Dkt. No. 14. Plaintiff has not provided any address other than the address to which the undeliverable mail was sent. See generally Dkt. More than sixty days have passed since the mail was returned to the Court undelivered, and the Court has received no communication from Plaintiff.
Plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Rule 3-11(a) which requires a party proceeding pro se to “promptly file with the Court and serve upon all opposing parties a Notice of Change of Address specifying the new address” when his address changes. Local Rule 3-11(b) allows the Court to dismiss a complaint without prejudice when mail directed to a pro se party is returned as not deliverable and the pro se party fails to send written notice of his current address within sixty days of the return of the undelivered mail.
This action is DISMISSED without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to keep the Court informed of his address in compliance with Local Rule 3-11(a).
Plaintiff's in forma pauperis application is DENIED as moot. Dkt. No. 6.
Because this dismissal is without prejudice, Plaintiff may ask to reopen the action. To do this, he must file both a signed complaint in accordance with the Clerk's Notice, and a motion with the words MOTION TO REOPEN written on the first page.
The Clerk shall close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.