Harris v. Lancaster Correctional Center

Filing 10

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: Plaintiff must update his 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: March 27, 2015: check for address. Ordered by Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(TCL )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
LAWRENCE W. HARRIS,
Plaintiff,
v.
LANCASTER CORRECTIONAL
CENTER,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

8:14CV321

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On February 18, 2015, the clerk
of the court sent an order to Plaintiff at his last known address and it was returned to this
court as undeliverable. (See Filing No. 9.) Plaintiff has an obligation to keep the court
informed of his 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: Plaintiff must update his 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: March 27, 2015: check for address.
DATED this 2nd day of March, 2015.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
Senior 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.