Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-5_18-cv-00217/USCOURTS-ared-5_18-cv-00217-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

PINE BLUFF DIVISION 

JOSHUA STRICKLIN PLAINTIFF 

ADC #138119 

v. No: 5:18-cv-00217 KGB-PSH 

FLORENCE HADLEY DEFENDANT 

PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

INSTRUCTIONS

 The following Recommendation has been sent to United States District Judge 

Kristine G. Baker. You may file written objections to all or part of this 

Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the 

factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be received by the Clerk of this 

Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you 

may waive the right to appeal questions of fact. 

DISPOSITION

 Plaintiff Joshua Stricklin filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 

on August 24, 2018 (Doc. No. 2).1

 On December 30, 2019, defendant Florence 

                                                             1 In its initial order to Stricklin, the Court notified him of his duty to promptly notify the Clerk 

and the parties of any change in his address. The Court also notified Stricklin that if any communication 

from the Court to him is not responded to within 30 days, his case may be dismissed without prejudice. 

Doc. No. 3. 

Case 5:18-cv-00217-KGB Document 40 Filed 02/14/20 Page 1 of 3
Hadley filed a motion to compel discovery (Doc. No. 32). The Court entered a text 

order notifying Stricklin that if he wished to respond to the motion, he must do so 

within fourteen days (Doc. No. 34). The envelope containing that order was returned 

to the Court as undeliverable because Stricklin had been paroled. It was entered on 

the docket (Doc. No. 35). 

On January 9, 2020, the Court entered a text order notifying Stricklin that mail 

sent to him by the Court at his address of record was returned as undeliverable (Doc. 

No. 36). Stricklin was directed to provide notice of his current mailing address by 

no later than thirty days from the entry of the January 9, 2020 text order. He was 

warned that his failure to provide a current mailing address would cause the 

undersigned to recommend his complaint be dismissed. A printed version of the text 

order was sent to Stricklin at his last (and only) known address. The envelope 

containing the Court’s January 9 order was returned, again with a notice that 

Stricklin had been paroled and thus was no longer at the address he provided. The 

envelope was entered on the docket. See Doc. No. 37. 

 More than 30 days have passed, and Stricklin has not complied or otherwise 

responded to the January 9 order. Stricklin failed to notify the Clerk and the other 

parties to the proceedings of a change in his address as required by Local Rule 

5.5(c)(2). Accordingly, the Court finds that this action should be dismissed without 

prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) and failure to respond to 

Case 5:18-cv-00217-KGB Document 40 Filed 02/14/20 Page 2 of 3
the Court’s orders. See Miller v. Benson, 51 F.3d 166, 168 (8th Cir. 1995) (District 

courts have inherent power to dismiss sua sponte a case for failure to prosecute, and 

exercise of that power is reviewed for abuse of discretion). 

 It is therefore recommended that Stricklin’s complaint (Doc. No. 2) be 

dismissed without prejudice and Hadley’s Motion to Compel (Doc. No. 32) be 

denied as moot. 

 DATED this 14th day of February, 2020. 

 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 5:18-cv-00217-KGB Document 40 Filed 02/14/20 Page 3 of 3