Dwight v. Duckworth et al

Filing 17

ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 14 Report and Recommendation dismissing with prejudice for lack of prosecution. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 10/31/16. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Clark D. Dwight,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 1:16cv652

C. Duckworth, et al.,

Judge Michael R. Barrett

Defendants.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by the
Magistrate Judge on September 20, 2016 (Doc. 14).
Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C),
including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections
to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. United States v. Walters, 638
F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). The Court notes multiple Show Cause Orders issued by the
Magistrate Judge which were returned as undeliverable (See Docs. 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, and
13). Despite proper notice being served upon Plaintiff, the Report and
Recommendation (Doc. 14) was returned to the Court due to Plaintiff=s failure to apprise
the Court of his change of address (See Doc. 16). By failing to keep the Court apprised
of his current address, Plaintiff demonstrates a lack of prosecution of his action. See,
e.g., Theede v. United States Department of Labor, 172 F.3d 1262, 1265 (10th Cir.
1999)(Failure to object to a Magistrate Judge=s Report and Recommendation due to
delay resulting from party=s failure to bring to the court=s attention a change in address
constitutes failure to object in a timely manner. Because the Recommendation was

1

mailed to the last known address, it was properly served, and party waived right to
appellate review). See also Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 109 (6th Cir. 1991)(A pro se
litigant has an affirmative duty to diligently pursue the prosecution of his cause of action);
Barber v. Runyon, No. 93-6318, 1994 WL 163765, at *1 (6th Cir. May 2, 1994) (A pro se
litigant has a duty to supply the court with notice of any and all changes in his address).
No objections to the Magistrate Judge=s Report and Recommendation have been filed.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 14) of
the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED.

Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 3) is

DISMISSED with prejudice for lack of prosecution.
Any request for certificate of appealability or request to appeal in forma pauperis
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), would not be taken in good faith and would be denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Michael R. Barrett
Michael R. Barrett
United States District Judge

2