IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

 NORTHERN DIVISION

 ________________________________

JOHN GREER, #87837 *

Plaintiff, *

 v. * 2:06-CV-783-ID

 (WO)

SHERIFF D.T. MARSHALL, et al., *

Defendants. *

 ________________________________

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action was filed by Plaintiff on August 31, 2006. On

September 11, 2006 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. 6.) 

On October 31, 2006, Plaintiff submitted a notice of change of address. The court

directed the Clerk to send a copy of Defendants’ recently submitted written reports to

Plaintiff’s new address and granted him an extension to respond thereto. (Doc. No. 15.) The

envelope containing Plaintiff’s copy of this order, including copies of Defendants’ written

reports, was returned to the court on November 27, 2007, marked “return to sender, refused.”

Consequently, the court entered an order on November 29, 2006 directing Plaintiff to provide

the court with his present address on or before December 11, 2006. ( Doc. No. 16.) Plaintiff

was cautioned that his failure to comply with the court's November 29 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 2:06-cv-00783-ID-SRW Document 17 Filed 12/15/2006 Page 1 of 3
Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the 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 DIRECTED to file any objections to the

Recommendation on or before December 28, 2006. Any objections filed must specifically

identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which the party is

objecting. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the 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 on

September 30, 1981.

DONE, this 15th day of December, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-00783-ID-SRW Document 17 Filed 12/15/2006 Page 2 of 3
3

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00783-ID-SRW Document 17 Filed 12/15/2006 Page 3 of 3