Opinion
14-CV-1511 (RRM) (LB)
04-15-2016
CHIRON WATKINS, Plaintiff, v. NYPD 69TH PRECINCT, P.O. ANGELA CRENSHAW, Shield #1584, P.O. MATTHEW WOODS, Shield #21755, and SERGEANT JEANNE LEE, Shield #1875, Defendants.
ORDER
Plaintiff pro se Chiron Watkins filed this lawsuit on February 28, 2014, alleging that he was unlawfully arrested by the defendants on November 15, 2012. On May 22, 2014, the defendants' counsel informed the Court that Watkins had been discharged from New York City Department of Correction custody, and after separately confirming this fact, Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom ordered Watkins to provide the Court with his current address by June 23, 2014. (Doc. No. 13.) Watkins failed to do so. On August 14, 2014, Magistrate Judge Bloom issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that this Court dismiss Watkins' action without prejudice. Magistrate Judge Bloom reminded the parties that, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any objections to the R&R were due within fourteen (14) days of its receipt. (Doc. No. 16 at 4.) As of this date, no party has filed any objections.
The Court notes that mailings in several related cases that Watkins has filed have been returned to the Court as undeliverable. See Watkins v. Hynes, et al., No. 13-CV-5029 (RRM) (LB) (E.D.N.Y.); Watkins v. C.O. Townes, No. 13-CV-5494 (RRM) (LB) (E.D.N.Y.); Watkins v. City of the State of New York Kings County et al., 14-CV-1512 (RRM) (LB) (E.D.N.Y.). It is Watkins' obligation to notify the Court of a change of address. See Conception v. Ross, No. 92-CV-770, 1997 WL 777943, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 1997); Gonzalez v. Walker, No. 10-CV-2896, 2011 WL 534358, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Jan. 6, 2011). A pro se litigant's failure to provide the Court with notice of a change of address warrants dismissal without prejudice. See Dong v. United States, No. 02-CV-7751, 2004 WL 385117, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2004) ("[N]o remedy other than dismissal makes sense" when the Court is unable to reach the plaintiff.). To date, Watkins has not contacted the Court with an updated address. --------
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error and, finding none, concurs with and adopts the R&R in its entirety. See Covey v. Simonton, 481 F. Supp. 2d 224, 226 (E.D.N.Y. 2007). Accordingly, the action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order and the accompanying Judgment to plaintiff, and close this case.
SO ORDERED.
Roslynn R . Mauskopf
ROSLYNN R. MAUSKOPF
United States District Judge Dated: Brooklyn, New York
April 15, 2016