Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_03-cv-00969/USCOURTS-almd-2_03-cv-00969-0/pdf.json

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

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

 NORTHERN DIVISION

 _______________________________

 

DONNIE STEVERSON, #213 110 *

Plaintiff, *

v. * CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:03-CV-969-F

(WO)

BARBARA JONES, et al., *

Respondents. *

 _______________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action was filed by Plaintiff on September 22, 2003. On

November 12, 2003 the court entered an order of procedure which instructed Plaintiff,

among other things, to inform the court of any change in his address. (Doc. No. 9.) 

T he court recently ascertained that Plaintiff is no longer at the most recent address

he provided to the court. Consequently, an order was entered on September 30, 2005

directing Plaintiff to provide the court with his present address on or before October 11,

2005. ( Doc. No. 22.) Plaintiff was cautioned that his failure to comply with the court's

September 30 order would result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. (Id.)

Because Plaintiff has filed nothing in response to this order, the court concludes that this

case should be dismissed.

Case 2:03-cv-00969-MEF-SRW Document 23 Filed 10/24/05 Page 1 of 3
2

Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of t he Magistrate Judge that this case

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

and to comply with the orders of this court. 

 It is further

ORDERED that the parties are DIRECT ED to file any objections to the said

Recommendation on or before November 7, 2005. Any objections filed must specifically

identify the findings in the Magistrat e Judge's Recommendation objected to. Frivolous,

conclusive or general objections will not be considered by t he District Court. The parties

are advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is

not appealable.

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

the Magistrate Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the

District Court of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on

appeal factual findings in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon

grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir.

1982). See Stein v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner

v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981, en banc), adopting as binding precedent

all of the decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business

Case 2:03-cv-00969-MEF-SRW Document 23 Filed 10/24/05 Page 2 of 3
3

on September 30, 1981.

DONE, this 24th day of October, 2005.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:03-cv-00969-MEF-SRW Document 23 Filed 10/24/05 Page 3 of 3