Hudson v. Tri-Con Industry et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER that the Plaintiff must update her address within 30 days. Failure to do so will result in dismissal of this action without further notice to Plaintiff. The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management deadline in this case using the following text: September 3, 2015: check for address. Ordered by Judge John M. Gerrard. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (JSF)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
BEATRICE HUDSON,
Plaintiff,
v.
TRI-CON INDUSTRY, U-STOP
CONVENIENT STORE, and
LINCOLN POLICE DEPT.,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

4:15CV3034

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On July 6, 2015, the clerk
of the court sent an order to Plaintiff at her last known address and it was returned to
this court as undeliverable. (See Filing No. 7.) Plaintiff has an obligation to keep the
court informed of her current address at all times. See NEGenR 1.3(e) and (g)
(requiring pro se parties to adhere to local rules and inform the court of address
changes within 30 days). This case cannot be prosecuted in this court if Plaintiff’s
whereabouts remain unknown.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.
Plaintiff must update her address within 30 days. Failure to do so will
result in dismissal of this action without further notice to Plaintiff.
2.
The clerk of the court is directed to set a pro se case management
deadline in this case using the following text: September 3, 2015: check for address.

DATED this 3rd day of August, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/ John M. Gerrard
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.

2