Opinion
Civil Action No. 1:05-CV-178.
June 19, 2006
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff William C. Taylor, a former prisoner, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against Rena A. Keal.
The above-styled action was referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to the United States Magistrate Judge for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.
Discussion
Plaintiff was released from custody after this lawsuit was filed. He has updated his address on two occasions since his release. The defendant has notified the court that disclosures sent to the plaintiff at his most recent address were returned with a notation that the mail was unclaimed as of May 30, 2006. Thus, it appears that the address in the court's file is no longer a valid address for the plaintiff.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) authorizes the district court to dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to prosecute or to comply with a court order. Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030, 1031 (5th Cir. 1998). "The power to invoke this sanction is necessary in order to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases and to avoid congestion in the calendars of the District Courts." Link v. Wabash Railroad, 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962); Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 522 U.S. 875 (1997).
By neglecting to provide the Court with his current address, plaintiff has failed to prosecute this case diligently. It is the conclusion of the Court that plaintiff has abandoned his case. Accordingly, this action should be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Recommendation
This case should be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Objections
Within ten (10) days after receipt of the magistrate judge's report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations contained within this report within ten days after service shall bar an aggrieved party from de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court except on grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United Services Automobile Association, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72.