Jones v. Drew et al

Filing 6

OPINION AND ORDER adopting 4 Final Report and Recommendation. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 3/25/2016. (anc)

in forma pauperis. On June 22, 2015, the Magistrate Judge ordered Plaintiff to
either pay the fee or submit the required affidavit within thirty (30) days. ([2]).
The Court advised Plaintiff that failure to comply with the order could result in the
dismissal of this action. The order was mailed to Plaintiff, and was returned to the
Court as undeliverable. ([3]).
On August 30, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued his R&R. The R&R
recommends dismissal of this action for failure to comply with a lawful order of
the Court, and for Plaintiff’s failure to keep the Clerk’s office informed of his
current address.
II.

DISCUSSION
A.

Legal Standard

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams
v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983).
No party objects to the R&R, and the Court thus conducts a plain error review of
the record. See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983).

2

B.

Analysis

Under Local Rule 41.3(A)(2), “[t]he court may, with or without notice to the
parties, dismiss a civil case for want of prosecution if: . . . [a] plaintiff . . . shall,
after notice, . . . fail or refuse to obey a lawful order of the court in the case.” LR
41.3(A)(2), NDGa.
The Local Rules also provide that a pro se party’s failure to “keep the
clerk’s office informed of any change in address . . . which causes a delay or
otherwise adversely affects the management of the case shall constitute
grounds . . . for dismissal of the action without prejudice.” LR 41.2(C).
The Court finds no plain error in the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation
that this action be dismissed for failure to comply with a lawful order of the Court,
and for Plaintiff’s failure to keep the Clerk’s office informed of his current address.
See Slay, 714 F.2d at 1095. This action is dismissed.
III.

CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Russell G. Vineyard’s

Final Report and Recommendation [4] is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

3

SO ORDERED this 25th day of March, 2016.

_______________________________
WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

4