Gray et al v. McKann et al

Filing 70

ORDER directing Plaintiff Bashford to notify this Court of his current address & his intent to continue prosecution with this action, pro se, within 30 days of the date of this Order. Failure to comply with this Order will result in the dismissal of Plaintiff Bashford from this action. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 9/9/2011. (jct)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION RUBBY JAMES GRAY, ADC #500127, and PAUL BASHFORD v. PLAINTIFFS 3:11-cv-00061-JMM-JTK JACK MCKANN, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER On September 6, 2011, a copy of the August 24, 2011 Order which was mailed to Plaintiff Bashford at his last-known address, was returned to sender (Doc. No. 65). Pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), a pro se plaintiff must promptly notify the Clerk of the Court and other parties of any change in his address, and must monitor the progress of the case and prosecute it diligently. Furthermore, the Local Rule provides for the dismissal without prejudice of any action in which communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is not responded to within thirty days. Although Plaintiff Bashford has apparently changed his address, this Order will be sent to his last-known address. Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff Bashford shall notify this Court of his current address and his intent to continue prosecution with this action, pro se, within thirty days of the date of this Order. Failure to comply with this Order shall result in the dismissal of Plaintiff Bashford from this action. IT IS SO ORDERED this 9th day of September, 2011. ____________________________________ JEROME T. KEARNEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 1

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?