McGee v. Scott et al

Filing 3

ORDER. The Court cautions McGee that he is responsible for immediately advising the Court of any change of address by filing a document entitled "Notice of Change of Address." Such notice shall contain only information pertaining to the address change. Failure to inform the Court of an address change may result in the dismissal of this case, without further notice of the Court. SEE ORDER FOR DETAILS. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 3/11/2015. (LMF)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
MARK TODD MCGEE,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No: 2:15-cv-142-FtM-38DNF

MICHAEL J. SCOTT, ROBERT
BROWN and MARC SMITH,
Defendants.
/
ORDER1
This matter comes before the Court on review of the docket. Plaintiff Mark McGee,
pro se, filed a complaint on March 5, 2015. (Doc. #1). Thereafter, the Court issued and
mailed a standing order to McGee. (Doc. #2). The order, however, was returned to the
Court as undeliverable. As a result, the Court cautions McGee that he is responsible for
immediately advising the Court of any change of address by filing a document entitled
"Notice of Change of Address." Such notice shall contain only information pertaining to
the address change. Failure to inform the Court of an address change may result in the
dismissal of this case, without further notice of the Court.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 11th day of March, 2015.

Copies: All Parties of Record
1

Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. These hyperlinks are
provided only for users’ convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees.
By allowing hyperlinks to other Web sites, this court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties
or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third
parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact
that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.