Strickland v. Frudiker

Filing 36

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER on the court's own motion. This matter is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute this matter diligently and failure to comply with the courts orders; All pending motions are denied as moot; and A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (MKR)

Strickland v. Frudiker

Doc. 36

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
RAYMOND H. STRICKLAND,
Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL T. FRUDIKER, and
ROBERT DELLUTRI, Correction
Center Officers,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CASE NO. 8:12CV288

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On June 21, 2013, the court
entered a Memorandum and Order that directed Plaintiff to apprise the court of his current
address. (Filing No. 33.) In the Memorandum and Order, the court warned Plaintiff that
failing to apprise the court of his current address by July 19, 2013, would result in the
dismissal of this case without further notice.

(Id.)

The court’s June 21, 2013,

Memorandum and Order was returned as undeliverable. (See Filing No. 35.) Plaintiff has
not provided the court with his current address. (See Docket Sheet.)
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

This matter is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute this matter
diligently and failure to comply with the court’s orders;

2.

All pending motions are denied as moot; and

3.

A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum
and Order.

DATED this 12th day of August, 2013.
BY THE COURT:
s/Laurie Smith Camp
Chief 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.
Dockets.Justia.com