Gonzales v. Southmayd

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT October 01, 2021 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION JOSE M GONZALES III, § § Plaintiff, § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:21-CV-145 § ALDEN E SOUTHMAYD III, et al, § § Defendants. § MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Jose M Gonzales filed this prisoner civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on July 4, 2021. However, Plaintiff has failed to pursue this action by failing to update his current contact information. (D.E. 16; D.E. 17 and D.E. 18). A review of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice website does not have anyone with Plaintiff’s name and inmate number listed. Plaintiff was ordered to “notify the Court of any change of address by filing a written notice of change of address with the Clerk.” (D.E. 7, Page 2). Plaintiff was further warned that “[f]ailure to file such notice may result in this case be dismissed for want of prosecution.” (D.E. 7, Page 2). Plaintiff has failed to comply with the undersigned’s Order to update his current contact information. Further, while he previously actively participated in this litigation, his last contact with this Court was on July 30, 2021. (D.E. 9). Therefore, it is respectfully recommended that Plaintiff’s case be DISMISSED pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); see also Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (Sth Cir. 1997) (holding district courts have the power to sua sponte dismiss a cause of action for failure to prosecute). ORDERED this Ist day of October, 2021. C Jason B. Libby Z United States Magistrate Judge 2/3 NOTICE TO PARTIES The Clerk will file this Memorandum and Recommendation and transmit a copy to each party or counsel. Within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy of the Memorandum and Recommendation, a party may file with the Clerk and serve on the United States Magistrate Judge and all parties, written objections, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(c); Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and Article IV, General Order No. 2002-13, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. A party’s failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).