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.)
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?