Dix v. Grimes et al

Filing 6

RULING: The above-captioned proceeding be DISMISSED, without prejudice, for failure of Plaintiff to comply with the Court's directives and for failure to prosecute this proceeding by failing to keep the Court apprised of a current address. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. Signed by Judge James J. Brady on 4/24/2017. (LLH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

MICHAEL A. DIX

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS
TROY L. GRIMES, ET AL.

NO. 16-0808-JJB-EWD
RULING

Pro se Plaintiff, a prisoner previously confined at the East Baton Rouge Parish Prison,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana, filed a pleading entitled “Notice of Intent to File 1983 Petition” (R.
Doc. 1), wherein he signified his intention to commence a proceeding pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
' 1983 against East Baton Rouge Parish officials, complaining that these officials knowingly
placed his life “in potential grave danger.”
Pursuant to correspondence dated January 25, 2017 (R. Doc. 3), the Court directed
Plaintiff to resubmit his claim on the Court’s approved complaint form within twenty-one (21)
days and, within such time, to either pay the Court’s filing fee or submit a properly completed
Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and Statement of Account, blank copies of which were
attached to the referenced correspondence, certifying to the average six-month deposits and
balances in his inmate accounts.

The referenced correspondence specifically advised

Plaintiff that Afailure to amend the pleadings or provide the requested information or forms as
indicated will result in the dismissal of your suit by the Court without further notice.@ Id.
A review of the record by the Court reflects that Plaintiff has failed to comply with the
Court’s directives by resubmitting his claim in proper form and by either paying the Court’s
filing fee or submitting a properly completed Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis and
Statement of Account.

Instead, the referenced correspondence, which was forwarded to
1

Plaintiff at his record address, has been returned to the Court as undeliverable, marked
AReturn To Sender@ and “No Longer At Parish Prison.”

See R. Docs. 4 and 5.

It thus

appears that Plaintiff may have lost interest in pursuing this matter since his release or
transfer from the facility that he provided as his record address.
Pursuant to Local Rule 41(b)(4) of this Court, the failure of a pro se litigant to keep the
Court apprised of a change of address may constitute cause for dismissal for failure to
prosecute when a notice has been returned to a party or the Court for the reason of an
incorrect address, and no correction has been made to the address for a period of thirty (30)
days.

As a practical matter, this case cannot proceed without an address where Plaintiff

may be reached and where he may receive pleadings, notices or rulings.

Accordingly, the

Court concludes that the above-captioned proceeding should be dismissed, without
prejudice, for failure of Plaintiff to comply with the Court=s directives and for failure to
prosecute this proceeding by failing to keep the Court apprised of a current address.
Therefore,
IT IS ORDERED that the above-captioned proceeding be DISMISSED, without
prejudice, for failure of Plaintiff to comply with the Court=s directives and for failure to
prosecute this proceeding by failing to keep the Court apprised of a current address.
Judgment shall be entered accordingly.

Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on April 24, 2017.

S

JUDGE JAMES J. BRADY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

2