GOLDBERG v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al

Filing 40

MEMORANDUM, OPINION. Signed by Judge Noel L. Hillman on 9/3/2019. (rss, n.m.)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY ______________________________ : MARK GOLDBERG, : : No. 17-cv-6024 (NLH)(JS) Plaintiff, : : v. : MEMORANDUM OPINION : WARDEN DAVID ORTIZ, et al., : : Defendants. : ______________________________: IT APPEARING THAT: 1. Plaintiff Mark Goldberg filed a civil rights action brought pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). 2. ECF No. 1. On May 30, and August 21, 2019, the Clerk’s Office mailed to Plaintiff “Notices of Electronic Filing” (“NEF”). Nos. 31, 37. ECF The NEFs were sent to Plaintiff’s recently updated address of record at the Bronx Halfway House in Bronx, New York. See ECF Nos. 32, 39. 3. The NEFs mailed to Plaintiff’s address of record have been returned to sender with the envelop marked “Return to Sender, Attempted Not Known, Unable To Forward.” See id. appears that Plaintiff is no longer residing at the Bronx It Halfway House, which is confirmed by a recent search on the Bureau of Prison’s inmate locator, available at 1 https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/. 4. Plaintiff has not communicated with the Court regarding his new address, in violation of Local Civil Rule 10.1. See L. Civ. R. 10.1(a) (“Counsel and/or unrepresented parties must advise the Court of any change in their or their client’s address within seven days of being apprised of such change by filing a notice of said change with the Clerk.”). 5. Based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with Local Civil Rule 10.1, the Clerk of the Court will be ordered to administratively terminate this case, with the right to reopen this matter upon Petitioner updating his contact information to satisfy the appropriate Rules. 6. An appropriate order follows. Dated: September 3, 2019 At Camden, New Jersey s/ Noel L. Hillman NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?