Lee v. Bivins

Full title: MICHAEL JEROME LEE, Plaintiff, v. DAISEY BIVINS, Food Service Director, et…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION

Date published: Jan 30, 2017

Case No. 3:16cv704-LC-CJK (N.D. Fla. Jan. 30, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 3:16cv704-LC-CJK

01-30-2017

MICHAEL JEROME LEE, Plaintiff, v. DAISEY BIVINS, Food Service Director, et al., Defendants.

CHARLES J. KAHN, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff filed this action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, on December 28, 2016. See doc. 1. At the time, he was a federal prisoner confined at Century Correctional Institution. On December 29, 2016, the clerk of court mailed plaintiff a Notice to Pro Se Litigant (doc. 4) according to standard procedure. The notice was returned to the clerk's office on January 9, 2017, marked "RETURN TO SENDER," "REFUSED," "UNABLE TO FORWARD" and had a notation plaintiff was released on December 31, 2016 (doc. 5). Plaintiff therefore was released from prison almost one month ago, but has not contacted the court or provided a current mailing address. Based on the court's inability to contact plaintiff, completion of the preliminary screening process under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) or the issuance of any other order would be futile.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

1. That plaintiff's complaint (doc. 1) be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for plaintiff's failure to keep the court apprised of his mailing address.

2. That the clerk be directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 30th day of January, 2017.

/s/ _________

CHARLES J. KAHN, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations may be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court's internal use only , and does not control. A copy of objections shall be served upon the magistrate judge and all other parties. A party failing to object to a magistrate judge's findings or recommendations contained in a report and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See U.S. Ct. of App. 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.