Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02612/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02612-0/pdf.json

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

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WO LMH

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Tyler Davis Newsome, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joseph M. Arpaio, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 05-2612-PHX-DGC (DKD)

ORDER

T his is a civil rights action filed by a county jail inmate. Plaintiff has failed to submit

an address change. The Court will therefore dismiss this action for failure to prosecute.

A. Procedural History.

When Plaintiff filed his Complaint in August 2005, he listed the Durango Jail as his

address. The instructions accompanying the form complaint informed him that he must

“immediately notify the clerk . . . in writing of any change in your mailing address. Failure

to notify the court of any change in your mailing address may result in the dismissal of

your case.” Information and Instructions for a Prisoner Filing Civil Right s Complaint at 2,

¶ H. After he filed his action, Plaintiff was immediately sent a Not ice informing him that

he must keep the Court apprised of any change in address. See Dkt. #2. Not long

thereafter, the Notice was returned with the notation that t he mail was undeliverable. The

envelope was marked “released”and a box was checked for “no longer in custody.” 

Case 2:05-cv-02612-DGC--DKD Document 4 Filed 10/20/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

See Dkt. #3. Since that time, more than a month has elapsed, and Plaintiff has not yet

submitted an updated address.

B. Failure to prosecute.

T he Court has no affirmative obligation to locate Plaintiff. “A party, not the dist rict

court, bears the burden of keep ing the court apprised of any changes in his mailing

address.” Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1441 (9th Cir. 1988) (per curiam). If the Court were

to show cause Plaintiff why dismissal were not warranted, t he Order “would only find itself

taking a round trip tour through the United States mail.” Id.

The Court is also not required to hold the matter in abeyance in hopes that an

address change will be forthcoming. “It would be absurd to require the district court to

hold a case in abeyance indefinitely just because it is unable, through the plaintiff’s own

fault, to contact the plaintiff to determine if his reasons for not p rosecuting his lawsuit are

reasonable or not.” Carey, 856 F.2d at 1441. Because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this

action, see FED.R.CIV. P. 41(b), the Court will dismiss his action without prejudice.

IT IS THEREFORE O RDERED that the Complaint and this action are dismissed

without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

DATED this 20th day of October, 2005.

Case 2:05-cv-02612-DGC--DKD Document 4 Filed 10/20/05 Page 2 of 2