Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-5_05-cv-05215/USCOURTS-arwd-5_05-cv-05215-2/pdf.json

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

---

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

MARIO ROBERT OVALLE, SR. PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 05-5215

 

SHERIFF KEITH FERGUSON;

CAPTAIN HUNTER PETRAY;

DR. NEIL MULLINS; and

NURSE SUE McDONALD DEFENDANTS

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Mario Robert Ovalle, Sr., filed this pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983

on December 30, 2005. His complaint was filed in forma pauperis (IFP). At the time he filed

the complaint, Ovalle was incarcerated at the Benton County Detention Center.

On June 1, 2006, the court entered an order granting the defendants an extension of time

to file their court ordered summary judgment motion (Doc. 15). On June 8, 2006, the order sent

by the court to Ovalle at the Benton County Detention Center was returned as

undeliverable–attempted not known. 

On June 16, 2006, the defendants filed a motion to dismiss (Doc. 16). Defendants

indicate they have been unable to serve plaintiff with their motion for an extension of time and

their discovery requests. 

Ovalle has not communicated with the court. No other address for the plaintiff appears

in the file. 

I therefore recommend defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted and Ovalle’s complaint

be dismissed on the grounds he has failed to prosecute this action and obey the rules of the court

requiring him to keep the court informed of his address. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

Case 5:05-cv-05215-JLH Document 19 Filed 06/28/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

The parties have ten days from receipt of the report and recommendation in which

to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely

objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. The parties are

reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the

district court.

DATED this 28th day of June 2006.

/s/ Beverly Stites Jones 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

Case 5:05-cv-05215-JLH Document 19 Filed 06/28/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>