Lewis v. Fisher et al

Filing 11

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - that the Plaintiff failed to respond to the court's September 16, 2009, Memorandum and Order requiring that he provide the court with a current address. This action is therefore dismissed without prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA DONNIE R. LEWIS JR., Plaintiff, v. BRENDA FISHER, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 4:09CV3142

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On September 16, 2009, the court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to inform the court of his current address. (Filing No. 10.) In its Memorandum and Order, the court cautioned Plaintiff that failure to show cause or to update his address by October 16, 2009, would result in dismissal without further notice. (Id.) Plaintiff has not responded to this court's previous Memorandum and Order nor has Plaintiff updated his address with the court. This case is therefore dismissed without prejudice. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff failed to respond to the court's September 16, 2009, Memorandum and Order requiring that he provide the court with a current address. This action is therefore dismissed without prejudice; and A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order.

2.

DATED this 1st day of December, 2009. BY THE COURT:

s/Laurie Smith Camp United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska 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.