Ojo v. Hillsborough County Department of Corrections

Filing 109

/// ORDER dismissing, with prejudice 1 Complaint for the reasons set forth therein. So Ordered by Judge Steven J. McAuliffe.(jbw)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
Osahenrumwen Ojo,
Plaintiff
v.

Case No. 12-cv-204-SM
Opinion No. 2015 DNH 178

Hillsborough County Department
of Corrections, et al.,
Defendants
O R D E R
From June through August of 2011, pro se plaintiff,
Osahenrumwen Ojo, was a detainee at the Hillsborough County House
of Corrections.

He claims that while there, he was subjected to

several pat-down searches during which corrections officers
intentionally grabbed his genitals.

In this action, he advances

both state and federal claims in which he asserts, in essence,
that defendants sexually assaulted him.

On August 7, 2015, counsel for defendants notified the court
that several pieces of mail directed to Ojo at his last known
address had been returned as undeliverable.
Notice/Report (document no. 108).

See Defendants’

And, despite their efforts to

locate Ojo, defendants had been unsuccessful.

Defendants then

learned (and the court has independently confirmed) that, on or
about April 28, 2015, Ojo was deported to his native country,
Nigeria.

In the intervening five months, Ojo has failed to furnish
the court or opposing counsel with his current mailing address,
telephone number, or other contact information (nor has he given
any other indication that he wishes to continue to pursue this
case).

See generally Local Rule 83.6(e) (“An attorney or pro se

party who has appeared before the court on a matter is under a
continuing duty to notify the clerk’s office of any change of
address and telephone number.”).

Consequently, the court is

unable to contact Ojo and afford him an opportunity to show cause
why his complaint should not be dismissed for failure to
prosecute and/or for failure to comply with this court’s local
rules.

Considering the totality of circumstances presented particularly the fact that plaintiff has been deported to Nigeria
and has, for several months, failed to notify the court or
opposing counsel of his new contact information - as well as the
range of options available to the court, see, e.g., Vazquez-Rijos
v. Anhang, 654 F.3d 122, 127 (1st Cir. 2011), the court concludes
that it is appropriate to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for
failure to prosecute and failure to comply with this court’s
local rules.

See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 83.6(e).

See

generally Dullen v. Grafton Cty. Dep’t of Corr., 2004 WL 102494,
2004 DNH 021 (D.N.H. Jan. 22, 2004) (dismissing plaintiff’s

2

complaint for failure to prosecute and failure to notify court of
changed address).

Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed, with prejudice.

The

Clerk of Court shall enter judgment in accordance with this order
and close the case.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________
Steven J. McAuliffe
United States District Judge
September 15, 2015
cc:

Osahenrumwen Ojo, pro se
John A. Curran, Esq.

3