IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

CLIFFORD P. TURNER § 

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23cv153 

U.S. MARSHAL’S OFFICE § 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Clifford P. Turner, proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled petition for writ of habeas

corpus. This matter was referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 636 and the Amended Order for the Adoption of Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties

to the United States Magistrate Judge for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations

for the disposition of the case.

Discussion

The court previously entered an order directing petitioner to provide additional information

concerning his petition. The order was sent to petitioner at the LeBlanc Unit, the address petitioner

provided to the court. The copy of the order sent to petitioner was returned to the court with a

notation indicating petitioner has been released. Petitioner has not supplied the court with a new

address or otherwise contacted the court.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) authorizes the district court to dismiss an action for

want of prosecution sua sponte whenever necessary to achieve the orderly and expeditious

disposition of cases. Anthony v. Marion County General Hospital, 617 F.2d 1164, 1167 (5th Cir.

1980). See also McCullough v. Lynaugh, 835 F.2d 1126 (5th Cir. 1988). The orderly and

expeditious disposition of cases requires that if a litigant’s address changes, he has a duty to inform

the court of the change. Shannon v. State of Louisiana, 1988 WL 54768, No. 87-3951 (E.D. La.

May 23, 1988) (quoting Perkins v. King, No. 84-3310 (5th Cir. May 19, 1985)); see also Carey v.

King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1441 (9th Cir. 1988) (per curiam) (pro se plaintiff’s case dismissed for failure

to prosecute when he failed to keep the court apprised of his current address). In addition, Local

Case 1:23-cv-00153-MAC-ZJH Document 11 Filed 07/10/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 8
Rule CV-11(d) requires pro se litigants such as petitioner to provide the court with a physical

address and keep the clerk advised in writing of a current address.

By not providing the court with his correct address, petitioner has prevented the court from

communicating with him and moving this case towards resolution. He has therefore failed to

diligently prosecute this case. This case should accordingly be dismissed without prejudice for want

of prosecution.

Recommendation

This petition for writ of habeas corpus should be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

Objections

Within 14 days after receipt of the magistrate judge’s report, any party may serve and file

written objections to the findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations of the magistrate

judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C).

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law and

recommendations contained within this report within 14 days after service shall bar an aggrieved

party from de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings, conclusions and

recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by

the district court except on grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United Services Automobile

Association, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72.

2

_________________________

Zack Hawthorn

United States Magistrate Judge SIGNED this 10th day of July, 2023.

Case 1:23-cv-00153-MAC-ZJH Document 11 Filed 07/10/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 9