Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-3_19-cv-00335/USCOURTS-ared-3_19-cv-00335-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Doe
Defendant
Alejandro Mendiola
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

ALEJANDRO MENDIOLA, PLAINTIFF 

Reg. #31495-009 

v. 3:19-cv-00335-DPM-JJV 

DOE DEFENDANT

PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

INSTRUCTIONS

The following recommended disposition has been sent to Chief United States District 

Judge D.P. Marshall Jr. Any party may serve and file written objections to this recommendation. 

Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. If 

the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the evidence that supports 

your objection. An original and one copy of your objections must be received in the office of the 

United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of the findings 

and recommendations. The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely 

objections may result in a waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. 

If you are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit new, different, or 

additional evidence, and to have a new hearing for this purpose before either the District Judge or 

Magistrate Judge, you must, at the time you file your written objections, include the following: 

1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is inadequate. 

2. Why the evidence to be proffered at the new hearing (if such a hearing is granted) 

was not offered at the hearing before the Magistrate Judge. 

3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at the new hearing in the form 

Case 3:19-cv-00335-DPM Document 5 Filed 12/30/19 Page 1 of 3
2 

of an offer of proof, and a copy or the original of any documentary or other non-testimonial 

evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing. 

From this submission, the District Judge will determine the necessity for an additional 

evidentiary hearing. Mail your objections and AStatement of Necessity@ to: 

Clerk, United States District Court 

Eastern District of Arkansas 

600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 

Little Rock, AR 72201-3325 

 DISPOSITION 

Alejandro Mendiola (“Plaintiff”) has filed a pro se Complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 

1983, alleging Defendants violated his constitutional rights at the Greene County Detention 

Facility (“GCDF”). (Doc. No. 1.) On November 21, 2019, I entered an Order giving Plaintiff 

thirty (30) days to either pay the filing fee in full or file an Application to Proceed In Forma 

Pauperis. (Doc. No. 2). I provided Plaintiff with the necessary forms and cautioned him I would 

recommend dismissal if he did not timely comply with my instructions. (Id.) My Order has been 

returned undelivered because Plaintiff is no longer in the GCDF, and he has not maintained a 

current mailing address with the Clerk as required by Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). (Doc. No. 4.) 

Plaintiff’s time to comply with my November 21, 2019 Order has expired. Without a 

current address, it would be futile to give him an extension of time to comply with my instructions. 

Thus, this case should be dismissed without prejudice due to a lack of prosecution. See Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). 

IT IS, THEREFORE, RECOMMENDED THAT: 

1. The Complaint (Doc. No. 1) be DISMISSED without prejudice. 

2. The Court should certify, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 1915(a)(3), that an in forma 

Case 3:19-cv-00335-DPM Document 5 Filed 12/30/19 Page 2 of 3
3 

pauperis appeal from an Order adopting this recommendation and the accompanying Judgment 

would not be taken in good faith. 

DATED this 30th day of December 2019. 

 

JOE J. VOLPE 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 3:19-cv-00335-DPM Document 5 Filed 12/30/19 Page 3 of 3