Venzant v. Allen et al

Filing 19

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER dismissing this case without prejudice. Defendants' 10 Motion to Dismiss is dismissed as moot. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge J. Leon Holmes on 11/14/2012. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
LARRY VENZANT
v.

PLAINTIFF
NO. 3:12CV00197 JLH/JTR

MIKE ALLEN,
Sheriff of Crittenden County, et al.

DEFENDANTS
OPINION AND ORDER

Larry Venzant has filed his pro se § 1983 action alleging that his constitutional rights were
violated while he was a pretrial detainee in the Crittenden County Detention Facility. On October 11,
2012, the Court entered an order giving Venzant thirty days to file a response to defendants’ motion
to dismiss. See Documents #10 and #12. Importantly, the Court advised Venzant that, if he failed
to timely do so, this case would be dismissed pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), which provides that:
It is the duty of any party not represented by counsel to promptly notify the
Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of any change in his or her address, to
monitor the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently. A
party appearing for himself/herself shall sign his/her pleadings and state his/her
address, zip code, and telephone number. If any communication from the Court to a
pro se plaintiff is not responded to within thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed
without prejudice. Any party proceeding pro se shall be expected to be familiar with
and follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Id.
As of today’s date, Venzant has not complied with the October 11, 2012 order, and the time
for doing so has expired.1

1

The October 11, 2012 order was returned to the Court as undeliverable because Venzant
was released from custody without providing a forwarding address. See Document #16. However,
Venzant has previously received an Order explaining his obligations under Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) and
the consequences of failing to do so. See Document #6.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1.

This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).

2.

Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Document #10) is DISMISSED AS MOOT.

3.

The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis

appeal would not be taken in good faith.
DATED this 14th day of November, 2012.

J. LEON HOLMES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-2-