Smith v. Fallin et al
OPINION AND ORDER by District Judge James H. Payne: dismissing case without prejudice for failure to prosecute (case terminated) (cjt, Deputy Clerk)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
KENNETH RICHARD SMITH, SR.,
MARY FALLIN, et al.,
No. CIV 16-237-JHP-SPS
OPINION AND ORDER
On January 26, 2017; January 27, 2017; and February 24, 2017, the Court entered minute
orders in this civil rights case and mailed copies to Plaintiff at his last known address (Dkts. 29, 31,
35). On February 6, 2017; February 14, 2017; and March 6, 2017, the orders were returned to the
Court by the U.S. Postal Service, marked “return to sender . . . unable to forward” (Dkts. 32, 33, 36).
Plaintiff has failed to advise the Court of his current address, as required by Local Civil Rule 5.6(a):
All papers shall contain the name, mailing address, daytime telephone number, fax
number, and e-mail address, if any, of the attorney or pro se litigant. If any of this
information changes, the attorney or pro se litigant must notify the Court by filing
the form provided by the Clerk and serving a copy on opposing counsel or pro se
parties. . . .”
Because Plaintiff has failed to comply with Local Civil Rule 5.6(a), this action is dismissed
without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See United States ex rel. Jimenez v. Health Net, Inc., 400
F.3d 853, 854-56 (10th Cir. 2005) (dismissing appeal sua sponte for failure to prosecute because
appellant disappeared and failed to meet court deadlines).
ACCORDINGLY, this action is, in all respects, DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for
failure to prosecute.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of May 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?