Steele v. Bennett et al
ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 12/1/17. (clc)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
HENRY J. STEELE,
GERALDINE BENNETT, et al.,
THIS MATTER is before the Court on periodic status review. On October 5, 2017, this
Court entered an order instructing Plaintiff to amend his Complaint within thirty (30) days. (Doc.
No. 32). The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to submit an Amended Complaint would result in
dismissal of this action without prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has not
yet filed an Amended Complaint.
The Court further notes that the docket report shows that mail sent to Plaintiff at his last
known address, Lanesboro Correctional Institution, was returned as undeliverable, with a notation
that he was released on April 20, 2017. See (Doc. No. 33). The Court’s order dated October 5,
2017, specifically warned Plaintiff that if he did not contact the Court within thirty days to give
the Court his current address, his action would be dismissed without prejudice for failure to
prosecute. In addition to the fact that this action is being dismissed based on Plaintiff’s failure to
submit an Amended Complaint in accordance with the Court’s order dated October 5, 2017, the
action is alternatively subject to dismissal because Plaintiff failed to notify the Court of his change
in address. Accord Walker v. Moak, Civil Action No. 07-7738, 2008 WL 4722386 (E.D. La. Oct.
22, 2008) (dismissing without prejudice a § 1983 action for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure where the plaintiff did not notify the court of his new
address upon his release from jail).
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that:
This action is dismissed without prejudice.
The Clerk is directed to terminate the case.
Signed: December 1, 2017
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?