Little v. Dub Brassell Detention Center et al
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION recommending that the District Court dismiss the 5 Amended Complaint without prejudice, under Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), for failure to comply with the Courts Order of 12/11/09. Objections to R&R due no later than 14 days from the date the Recommended Disposition is received. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 2/4/10. (hph)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT E A S T E R N DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS P I N E BLUFF DIVISION
D A R R Y L E. LITTLE, SR. A D C # 708998 V. C A S E NO. 5:09CV00313-JLH-BD
P L A IN T IF F
W . C. "DUB" BRASSELL DETENTION CENTER, et al.
R E C O M M E N D E D DISPOSITION I. P r o c e d u r e for Filing Objections T h e following Recommended Disposition has been sent to United States District C o u rt Chief Judge J. Leon Holmes. Any party may serve and file written objections to th is recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or le g a l basis for the objection. If the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify th a t finding and the evidence that supports your objection. An original and one copy of yo u r objections must be received in the office of the United States District Court Clerk no la te r than fourteen (14) days from the date you receive the Recommended Disposition. A c o p y will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. M a il your objections and "Statement of Necessity" to: C le rk , United States District Court E a s te rn District of Arkansas 6 0 0 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 L ittle Rock, AR 72201-3325
B ackground O n October 15, 2009, Plaintiff brought this action pro se under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983 (docket entry #2). He was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis by Order of O c to b e r 19, 2009 (#3). In that Order, Plaintiff was directed to file an Amended C o m p la in t, which he filed on November 13, 2009. Plaintiff's claims against the W. C. "Dub" Brassell Detention Center have been d is m is s e d (#11). Service of summons has not yet been effected upon Defendant Johnson. T h e Court has attempted to mail documents to Plaintiff concerning his case, using th e address on record, but those documents have been returned to the Court as u n d e liv e ra b le (#10, 13, 14, 18, 19). On December 11, 2009, Plaintiff was ordered to p ro v id e the Court with his new address within 30 days (#16). Plaintiff was reminded of th e requirements of Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) and was warned that failure to comply with a c o u rt order could result in dismissal of his case. Plaintiff has failed, however, to comply w ith the Court's Order. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Amended Complaint should be d is m is s e d without prejudice under Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). III. C o n c lu s io n T h e Court recommends that the District Court dismiss the Amended Complaint (# 5 ) without prejudice, under Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), for failure to comply with the Court's O rd e r of December 11, 2009.
DATED this 4th day of February, 2010.
___________________________________ U N IT E D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
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?