Opinion
1:21-cv-01608 JLT SKO
04-19-2022
TOBBUSHA DURANT PRATT, Plaintiff, v. HERLINDA YANDEZ, et al, Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE (DOC. 7)
Tobbusha Durant Pratt, a prisoner proceeding pro se, initiated this action by filing a complaint and “Fee Waiver Request” on November 4, 2021. (Docs. 1, 2.) On November 8, 2021, the assigned magistrate judge found the “Fee Waiver Request” did not comply with the specific informational requirements for affidavits submitted pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) and directed Plaintiff to either pay the $402 filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty days from the date of service of the Court's order. (Doc. 3.) On December 22, 2021, after Plaintiff failed to pay the filing fee or file an IFP application, the magistrate judge issued an order to show cause why the action should not be dismissed for his failure to comply with the Court's order and failure to prosecute this action. (Doc. 4.)
When served at Plaintiff's address of record, the order was returned as undeliverable on January 4, 2022. Thereafter, the assigned magistrate judge found Plaintiff also failed to comply with Local Rule 183(b), which requires parties “appearing in propria persona [to] keep the Court and opposing parties advised as to his or her current address, ” and to notify the Court of an address change within 63 days. (See Doc. 17 at 2-3; Local Rule 183(b).) Thus, the magistrate judge recommended the action be dismissed without prejudice on March 15, 2022. (Id. at 2.) The Court granted Plaintiff 21 days to file objections to the Findings and Recommendations. (Doc. 7 at 2.) However, the Findings and Recommendations were also returned to the Court with the notation “Undeliverable, RTS, Inmate Not Here.” To date, Plaintiff has not informed the Court of a proper address or taken any other action to prosecute the action.
According to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court conducted a de novo review of the case. Having carefully reviewed the entire file, the Court concludes the Findings and Recommendation are supported by the record and proper analysis. Thus, the Court ORDERS:
1. The Findings and Recommendation dated March 15, 2022 (Doc. 7), are ADOPTED.
2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.