Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-03465/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-03465-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
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

1

 Additionally, the Court’s service order warned Plaintiff that

his failure to timely comply with the provisions of the order would

result in the dismissal of the complaint pursuant to Rule 41(b),

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff was also warned that his

failure to acquire a waiver of service from Defendant or to complete

service of process on Defendant by March 8, 2006, would result in the

dismissal of the complaint pursuant to Rule 4(m), Federal Rules of

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

BOGAR RAMIREZ, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIV 05-03465 PHX SMM (MEA)

) 

JOSEPH ARPAIO, ) REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

) FOR DISMISSAL WITHOUT

Defendant. ) PREJUDICE

____________________________ )

Plaintiff, while an inmate at the Maricopa County

Durango Jail in Phoenix, Arizona, filed a pro se complaint

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on October 28, 2005. On November

9, 2005, the Court issued an order directing monthly payments be

made from Plaintiff’s inmate account and sent a copy of the

payment order to Plaintiff. The Court’s order also required

Plaintiff to complete and return a service packet for Defendant

to the Court by November 29, 2006. Plaintiff returned a service

packet to the Court, which was returned to Plaintiff for

correction on November 16, 2005.1

Case 2:05-cv-03465-SMM Document 8 Filed 03/14/06 Page 1 of 3
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

Civil Procedure, and Rule 16.2(b)(2)(B), of the United States District

Court for the District of Arizona Local Rules of Civil Procedure.

2 Because Plaintiff was released from custody, Plaintiff is

obligated to pay the filing fee for his section 1983 action within one

month of being released from custody. 

-2-

Plaintiff was apparently released from the custody of

the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department prior to November 22,

2005.2 See Docket No. 5. Plaintiff has not provided the Court

with his current address.

Rule 3.4, Local Rules of Civil Procedure for the United

States District Court for the District of Arizona requires

prisoner-litigants to comply with instructions attached to the

Court-approved complaint form for use in section 1983 actions.

Those instructions provide: “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 of your case.” 

Plaintiff was warned that failure to file a notice of

change of address or to otherwise comply with the Court’s orders

could result in the dismissal of his suit. Plaintiff has not

filed a notice of change of address and mail sent to his last

known address was returned. 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. See

Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1441 (9th Cir. 1988) (stating that

“[a]n order to show cause why dismissal is not warranted or an

order imposing sanctions would only finding itself taking a

round trip tour through the United States mail). 

Case 2:05-cv-03465-SMM Document 8 Filed 03/14/06 Page 2 of 3
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 -3-

THEREFORE, IT IS RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s complaint

be dismissed without prejudice for Plaintiff’s 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 13th day of March, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-03465-SMM Document 8 Filed 03/14/06 Page 3 of 3