Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-02535/USCOURTS-azd-2_04-cv-02535-0/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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Antonio Rojo Reyes, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joseph Arpaio, 

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 04-2535-PHX-EHC (MEA)

ORDER

Plaintiff, filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on November 10,

2004, which was dismissed with leave to amend, and an amended complaint on December

6, 2004, complaining of events and conditions regarding his detention at the Maricopa

County Durango jail. 

On November 24, 2004, the Court issued an order directing that monthly payments

be made from Plaintiff’s inmate account; a copy of the payment order was mailed to

Plaintiff. (see Dkt. 4). On November 22, 2005, the Court ordered Plaintiff to return a

service packet for Defendant Arpaio to the Court on or before December 12, 2005. (Dkt.

6). Plaintiff has apparently been released from the custody of the Maricopa County

Sheriff’s Department prior to December 5, 2005. (Dkt. 7). Mail sent to Plaintiff has been

Case 2:04-cv-02535-EHC Document 10 Filed 02/27/06 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 -

returned as undeliverable. No other addresses were provided and no forwarding

information is available. 

On January 20, 2006, Magistrate Judge Mark E. Aspey issued a Report and

Recommendation. (Dkt. 8). The opinion of Magistrate Judge Aspey recommended that

Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to file a notice

of change of address. The Court noted, "An order to show cause why this action should

not be dismissed for failure to serve the defendant or for failure to prosecute would be

futile." Recommendation, p. 2 (Dkt. 8). The Court cited Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439,

1441 (9th Cir. 1988) for the proposition that "[a]n order to show cause why dismissal is

not warranted . . . would only find itself taking a round trip tour through the United States

mail." Id. Plaintiff was mailed a copy of the Magistrate Judge's Report and

Recommendation. It, too, was returned as undeliverable. (Dkt. 9).

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED adopting the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation

(Dkt. 8) and dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint without prejudice for failure to comply

with Rule 3.4, Local Rules of Civil Procedure for the United States District Court for the

District of Arizona, and Rule 41(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

DATED this 22nd day of February, 2006.

Case 2:04-cv-02535-EHC Document 10 Filed 02/27/06 Page 2 of 2