Opinion
16-CV-3153 (LDH)(RML) 16-CV-3154 (LDH)(RML) 16-CV-3679 (LDH)(RML) 16-CV-3680 (LDH)(RML) 16-CV-3682 (LDH)(RML)
08-22-2016
NOT FOR PUBLICATION MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER LASHANN DEARCY HALL, United States District Judge:
Pro se plaintiff Koky Plaza filed the above-captioned complaints, which are each dated May 5, May 6, or May 25, 2016, but were not received in this Court until June 10, and June 20, 2016. At the time he filed the complaints, plaintiff stated that he was detained at either the Anna M. Kross Center or the Otis Bantum Correctional Center at Rikers Island. (See 16-cv-3154, Compl., ECF No. 1, at 1; 16-cv-2682, Compl., ECF No. 1, at 1.) Some of the complaints were accompanied by the Prisoner Authorization form required by the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act, but none included the filing fee or a request to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"). The Clerk's Office sent plaintiff a series of letters between June 16, and July 7, 2016, notifying him that in order to proceed, he must pay the filing fee or return the completed IFP form within 14 days from the date of the letter. More than 14 days have elapsed since all of the letters were mailed, and plaintiff has failed to submit the forms or pay the filing fees in any of the five cases.
On July 18, 2016, and July 22, 2016, the Court's letters in 16-cv-3154, 16-cv-3679, and 16-cv-3680 were returned with the notation "Return to Sender." (16-cv-3154, ECF No. 4; 16-cv-3679, ECF No. 4; 16-cv-3680, ECF No. 4.) Some of the returned envelopes contained the additional notation: "Disc." (16-cv-3679, ECF No. 5; 16-cv-3680, ECF No. 4.) A search of the inmate lookup database at the New York City Department of Correction, which manages the Rikers Island facilities where plaintiff was housed at the time he filed the complaints, returned no results. See http://a073-ils-web.nyc.gov/inmatelookup/pages/common/find.jsf (Last visited Aug. 3, 2016). Plaintiff has failed to provide a forwarding address as required.
Because plaintiff has not contacted the Court and the Court has no way of contacting plaintiff, the actions are all dismissed without prejudice for plaintiff's failure to prosecute. See Dong v. United States, No. 02-cv-7751, 2004 WL 385117, at *3 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 2, 2004) (dismissing for failure to prosecute where plaintiff failed to notify the Court of his address and the Court was unable to contact plaintiff). The Clerk of Court shall mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff's last known address.
SO ORDERED.
/s/ LDH
LASHANN DEARCY HALL
United States District Judge Dated: Brooklyn, New York
August 22, 2016