LINNEN v. BEACHMAN et al
Filing
3
OPINION. Signed by Judge Renee Marie Bumb on 7/11/2018. (rtm, )
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
CAMDEN VICINAGE
JERMAINE LINNEN,
Plaintiff
v.
BRENDA BEACHMAN, et al.,
Defendants
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
CIV. NO. 17-12647 (RMB)
OPINION
BUMB, United States District Judge
I.
BACKGROUND
On December 7, 2017, Plaintiff Jermaine Linnen, a former
inmate at Camden County Correctional Facility, brought this civil
rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Compl., ECF No. 1.)
On December 20, 2017, legal mail from the Court to Plaintiff was
returned by Camden County Correctional Facility because Plaintiff
was no longer incarcerated.
Plaintiff’s complaint cannot proceed
because he did not file a properly completed application to proceed
in forma pauperis (“IFP”) under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 (ECF No. 1-1),
and the Court has no way of contacting Plaintiff because he has
not provided his forwarding address.
II. DISCUSSION
Local Civil Rule 10.1(a) provides, in relevant part:
unrepresented parties must advise the Court of
any change in their . . . address within seven
days of being apprised of such change by
filing a notice of said change with the Clerk.
Failure to file a notice of change may result
in the imposition of sanctions by the Court.
Dismissing a Plaintiff’s complaint without prejudice is an
appropriate remedy for noncompliance with this rule.
See Archie
v. Dept. of Corr., Civ. No. 12-2466 (RBK/JS), 2015 WL 333299, at
*1 (D.N.J. Jan. 23, 2015) (collecting cases).
Mail sent to Plaintiff’s last known address was returned to
the Court.
To date, Plaintiff has not informed the Court of his
new address. When dismissing an action as a sanction, a court
should weigh the following factors:
(1) the extent of the party's personal
responsibility; (2) the prejudice to the
adversary caused by the failure to meet
scheduling orders and respond to discovery;
(3) a history of dilatoriness; (4) whether the
conduct of the party or the attorney was
willful or in bad faith; (5) the effectiveness
of sanctions other than dismissal, which
entails an analysis of alternative sanctions;
and (6) the meritoriousness of the claim or
defense.
Poulis v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co., 747 F.2d 863, 868 (3rd
Cir. 1984).
A.
Extent of the Party’s Personal Responsibility
Plaintiff,
as
an
unrepresented
litigant,
is
solely
responsible for providing the Court with his correct address.
2
B.
Prejudice to the Adversary
Defendants have not been served with the complaint because
Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee nor has he been granted in
forma pauperis status under 28 U.S.C. § 1915.
C.
History of Dilatoriness
Plaintiff has taken only one step in prosecuting this action,
filing the complaint.
D.
Whether the Conduct of the Party Was Willful or in Bad
Faith
It is not presently known whether Plaintiff’s failure to
prosecute this action was willful or in bad faith.
E.
Effectiveness of Alternative Sanctions
Sanctions other than dismissal will not be effective because
the Court cannot communicate any sanctions to Plaintiff without
his current mailing address.
F.
The Merits of the Claims or Defenses
The complaint has not yet been screened under 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2)(B), and the screening cannot occur until Plaintiff has
cures the deficiencies in his IFP application.
Weighing all the factors, dismissal as a sanction is warranted
in this case, primarily because the case cannot move forward
without a way to communicate with Plaintiff. The Court will dismiss
the complaint without prejudice.
An appropriate order follows.
3
III. CONCLUSION
In the accompanying Order filed herewith, this Court will
dismiss this action without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to
notify the Court of his forwarding address.
Dated:
July 11, 2018
s/Renée Marie Bumb
RENÉE MARIE BUMB
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
4
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?