Rickenbacker et al v. Town Of Babylon et al

Filing 11

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE: The Court's records reflect that mail sent to Lowrita Rickenbacker and Janelle Winn (together, "Plaintiff") at their address of record was returned to the Court marked Return to Sender, "Vacant" and "Unable to Forward." (See Docket Entry 9.) To date, Plaintiffs have not updated their address with the Court nor have they otherwise communicated with the Court since August 11, 2021. (See Docket Entry Nos. 1-5.) "The duty to inform the Court and defendants of any change of address is an obligation that rests with all pro se plaintiffs." Accordingly, on or before September 30, 2021, Plaintiffs must file a Notice of Change of Address providing the Court with a new address and telephone number at which Plaintiffs can be contacted during the course of the litigation. PLAINTIFFS ARE ADVISED THAT A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER WILL RESULT IN THIS ACTION BEING DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO RULE 41(b) OF THE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE. Ordered by Judge Joan M. Azrack on 9/8/2021. c/m to plaintiffs (Coleman, Laurie) Modified on 9/9/2021 to change document type to Opinion. (Coleman, Laurie).

Case 2:21-cv-04517-JMA-AKT Document 11 Filed 09/08/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 32

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
--------------------------------------------------------------X
LOWRITA RICKENBACKER, JANELLE WINN,

For On-line Publication Only

Plaintiffs,
-against-

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
21-CV-4517 (JMA)(AKT)

TOWN OF BABYLON, et al.,
Defendants.
-------------------------------------------------------------X
JOAN M. AZRACK, District Judge:
The Court’s records reflect that mail sent to Lowrita Rickenbacker and Janelle Winn
(together, “Plaintiffs”) at their address of record was returned to the Court marked “Return to
Sender”, “Vacant” and “Unable to Forward.” (See Docket Entry 9.) To date, Plaintiffs have not
updated their address with the Court nor have they otherwise communicated with the Court since
August 11, 2021. (See Docket Entry Nos. 1-5.)
“The duty to inform the Court and defendants of any change of address is ‘an obligation
that rests with all pro se plaintiffs.’” Phair v. Suffolk Cnty. Corr. Fac., No. 19-CV-3302, 2020
WL 3489495, *1 (E.D.N.Y. June 26, 2020) (quoting Alomar v. Recard, No. 07-CV-5654, 2010
WL 451047, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 9, 2010) (citation omitted); see also Terry v. City of New York,
No. 20-CV-0081, 2020 WL 5913409 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 6, 2020) (citing plaintiff’s “duty to . . . inform
this Court’s Pro Se Office of any change of address” in dismissing complaint for failure to
prosecute) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). As is readily apparent, this case
cannot proceed unless the Court and the defendants are able to contact Plaintiffs. Tomassi v.
Suffolk Cnty, No. 19-CV-2537, 2020WL 5633069, *2 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 21, 2020) (dismissing
complaint where pro se plaintiff did not update his address with the Court and did not respond to
defendant’s letter); see also Pagan v. Westchester Cnty., No. 12-CV-7669, 2014 WL 4953583, at

Case 2:21-cv-04517-JMA-AKT Document 11 Filed 09/08/21 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 33

*5 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 1, 2014 (“Absent valid contact information, the Court cannot apprise the
plaintiffs of their obligations in or the status of their case, and the litigation cannot proceed without
their participation.”). If a pro se litigant fails to keep the Court apprised of his or her current
mailing address, “the Court may dismiss the action under Rule 41(b) [of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure], for failure to prosecute.” Mercedes v. New York D.O.C., No. 12-CV-2293, 2013
WL6153208, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 21, 2013)
Accordingly, on or before September 30, 2021, Plaintiffs must file a Notice of Change
of Address providing the Court with a new address and telephone number at which Plaintiffs
can be contacted during the course of the litigation. PLAINTIFFS ARE ADVISED THAT
A FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS ORDER WILL RESULT IN THIS ACTION
BEING DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE PURSUANT TO RULE 41(b) OF THE
FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE.
Pursuant to Rule 77(d)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Clerk of the Court
shall serve notice of entry of this order upon Plaintiffs as provided in Rule 5(b)(C) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure and record such service on the docket.1 The Court certifies pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore
in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of any appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369
U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).

SO ORDERED.
Dated:

1

September 8, 2021
Central Islip, New York

____/s/ (JMA)_________________
Joan M. Azrack
United States District Judge

Although it is likely that this Order will be returned to the Court as undeliverable, Plaintiffs may view it on the
Court’s Electronic Case Filing (“ECF”) system.