Evans v. Bradley
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint Referred (42:1983) filed by Michael Rene Evans. Objections to R&R due by 7/9/2009. Signed by Honorable James R. Marschewski on June 19, 2009. (src)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION MICHAEL RENE EVANS v. RHONDA BRADLEY CASE NO.: 08-5259 DEFENDANT PLAINTIFF
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE Now before the Court is the Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2) Plaintiff filed his Complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1983 on December 12, 2008. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff did not complete his application to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) or provide the filing fee. It was unclear from Plaintiff's application if Plaintiff was incarcerated, and the Court returned the application to Plaintiff for clarification and to complete the inmate account portion of the document, if appropriate. (Doc. 3). The Court entered two new changes of address on behalf of the Plaintiff when his mail was returned as undeliverable. All returned mail was sent to the new addresses. The last change of address yielded no returned mail. However, Plaintiff has not completed his IFP application, paid the filing fee, or communicated with the Court in any manner. Accordingly, it is my recommendation that this case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and/or failure to obey an Order of the Court. Plaintiff has ten (10) days from receipt of this report and recommendation in which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. Plaintiff is reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the district court.
Dated this 19th day of June, 2009.
/s/ J. Marschewski HONORABLE JAMES R. MARSCHEWSKI UNITED 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?