Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02503/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-02503-0/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 JDDL

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Dwayne Endicott,

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Joseph Arpaio, et. al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 05-2503-PHX-EHC (ECV)

ORDER

Plaintiff Dwayne Endicott, previously incarcerated in the Maricopa County Jail inmate

at the Maricopa County Madison Jail in Phoenix, Arizona, filed a pro se Complaint pursuant

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The Court will dismiss the action without prejudice.

On August 19, 2005, the Court received Plaintiff’s Complaint for filing. The same

day, the Court issued a Notice of Assignment to Plaintiff. On August 19, 2005, the Notice

of Assignment was returned in the mail indicating that Plaintiff has been released from

custody. Plaintiff has not provided the Court with his present address.

Local Rule of Civil Procedure 3.4(a) requires that a prisoner-litigant comply with the

instructions attached to the court-approved complaint form. Those instructions state: “You

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

Case 2:05-cv-02503-EHC--ECV Document 4 Filed 11/02/05 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

JDDL - 2 -

of your case.” Information and Instructions for a Prisoner Filing Civil Rights Complaint at

2, ¶ H. To this date, Plaintiff has failed to provide the Court with his current address. 

Plaintiff was warned that failure to file a notice of change of address could result in

the dismissal of the action. See Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1441 (9th Cir. 1988)

(providing that “[a] party, not the district court, bears the burden of keeping the court

apprised of any changes in his mailing address.”). Plaintiff has not filed a notice of change

of address and mail sent to his last known address has been returned. An order to show cause

why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute would be futile. See Carey,

856 F.2d at 1441 (providing that “[a]n order to show cause why dismissal is not warranted

or an order imposing sanctions would only find itself taking a round trip tour through the

United States mail.”). Accordingly, this case will be dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule

41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment

accordingly.

DATED this 26th day of October, 2005.

Case 2:05-cv-02503-EHC--ECV Document 4 Filed 11/02/05 Page 2 of 2