Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-03165/USCOURTS-azd-2_05-cv-03165-0/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 JDN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Eberardo B. Lorenzo 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, et al., 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV 05-3165-PHX-MHM (ECV)

ORDER

Plaintiff Eberardo B. Lorenzo, a county jail inmate at the Maricopa County Estrella

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 October 11, 2005, the Court received Plaintiff’s Complaint for filing (Doc. # 1).

The same day, the Court issued a Notice of Assignment (Doc. # 2) to Plaintiff. On October

24, 2005, the Notice of Assignment was returned in the mail and designated undeliverable

(Doc. # 3). Plaintiff has not provided the Court with his present address, and more than five

months has elapsed since he filed his Complaint.

Rule 3.4(a) of the Local Rules of Civil Procedure 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 of your case.” Information and Instructions for a Prisoner Filing Civil

Case 2:05-cv-03165-MHM--ECV Document 4 Filed 04/13/06 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 -

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 6th day of April, 2006.

Case 2:05-cv-03165-MHM--ECV Document 4 Filed 04/13/06 Page 2 of 2