Verlander v. Aransas County Sheriffs Dept

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT May 28, 2024 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS Nathan Ochsner, Clerk CORPUS CHRISTI DIVISION ADAM WAYNE VERLANDER, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:24-CV-00065 § ARANSAS COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT, § et al., § § Defendants. § MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Adam Wayne Verlander filed this prisoner civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on March 8, 2024 alleging a deprivation of his rights as a pretrial detainee. Plaintiff was cautioned that he must keep the Court apprised of his current address if he was released from custody or transferred to another facility or his case would be dismissed. (D.E. 8, Page 2). Plaintiff has failed to pursue this action by failing to update his current contact information and he has failed to comply with the undersigned’s April 23, 2024 Order to update this information on or before May 23, 2024. (D.E. 21). Plaintiff was cautioned in the Initial Partial Filing and Collection Order that he “must notify the Court of any change of address by filing a written notice of change of address with the Clerk. Failure to file such notice may result in this case being dismissed for want of prosecution.” (D.E. 8, Page 2). Plaintiff was further cautioned by the undersigned that if he “fails to keep the Court 1 / 3 apprised of his contact information or fails to follow orders of this Court, this case will be dismissed for want of prosecution.” (D.E. 21, Page 2). 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); Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030, 1031 (Sth Cir. 1998) (same). ORDERED on May 28, 2024. 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). 3 / 3