Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_14-cv-00433/USCOURTS-almd-2_14-cv-00433-0/pdf.json

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

---

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MICHAEL A. OLIVER, #154 128, )

)

 Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-CV-433-WHA

) [WO]

KIM TOBIAS THOMAS, et al., )

)

 Defendants. )

 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action was filed by Plaintiff on June 3, 2014. On October 

29, 2014, the court entered an order of procedure directing Defendants to file an answer and written 

report to Plaintiff’s complaint. Doc. # 17. The October 29 order also instructed Plaintiff to inform 

the court of any change in his address, as all parties have an affirmative duty to inform this court 

of any address changes during the pendency of their actions. Id. at ¶8(h). 

 The court recently learned that Plaintiff is no longer housed at the Red Eagle Honor Farm

which is the last known service address the court has on file for him. See Doc. # 34. Consequently, 

an order was entered on May 24, 2016, directing Plaintiff to inform the court of his present mailing 

address. Doc. # 36. Plaintiff was cautioned that his failure to comply with the court's May 24 order 

would result in a recommendation this case be dismissed. Id.

On June 23, 2016, the envelope containing Plaintiff’s copy of the court’s May 24, 2016, 

order was returned to the court marked as “undeliverable.” As Plaintiff is no longer residing at the 

last service address he provided to the court and has not provided this court with a new address for 

service, the undersigned concludes that dismissal of the complaint is appropriate. 

Case 2:14-cv-00433-WHA-SRW Document 37 Filed 06/29/16 Page 1 of 2
2

Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge this case be 

DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failures to prosecute this action properly and to 

comply with the orders of this court. 

The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to file the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge 

and to serve a copy on Plaintiff at his last known address.

It is further

ORDERED that on or before July 13, 2016, the parties may file objections. Any 

objections filed must specifically identify the factual findings and legal conclusions in the 

Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation to which the parties object. Frivolous, conclusive or general 

objections will not be considered by the District Court.

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the 

Magistrate Judge’s report shall bar a party from a de novo determination by the District Court of 

factual findings and legal issues covered in the report and shall “waive the right to challenge on 

appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions” except upon 

grounds of plain error if necessary in the interests of justice. 11th Cir. R. 3-1; see Resolution Trust 

Co. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993); Henley v. Johnson, 885 

F.2d 790, 794 (11th Cir. 1989).

DONE, on this the 29th day of June, 2016.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker

Susan Russ Walker

Chief United States Magistrate Judge

Case 2:14-cv-00433-WHA-SRW Document 37 Filed 06/29/16 Page 2 of 2