Brown v. Oklahoma State of

W.D. Oklahoma

Brown v. Oklahoma State of

District Court, W.D. Oklahoma·Decided June 16, 2025·No. 5:25-cv-00296·Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

EDWARD R. BROWN, SR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-25-296-SLP ) STATE OF OKLAHOMA, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

O R D E R Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell [Doc. No. 14]. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with her Order to pay the initial partial filing fee [Doc. No. 12], his failure to comply with the Court’s rules, and his failure to pay the filing fee. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of his right to object to the R&R and directed that any objections be filed on or before June 12, 2025. [Doc. No. 14] at 5. To date, no objection has been filed, nor has an extension of time in which to object been sought or granted.1

1 The Court’s docket reflects that the R&R was returned in the mail as undeliverable even though it was mailed to Plaintiff’s address of record at the Comanche County Detention Center and the Oklahoma State Reformatory where prior orders in this action have been mailed. As noted by the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiff is responsible for providing notice of any change of address to the Court. See LCvR 5.4 (requiring written notice of a change of address and further providing that papers sent by the Court are “deemed delivered if sent to the last known address given to the court.”); see also Theede v. United States Dep’t of Labor, 172 F.3d 1262, 1267-68 (10th Cir. 1999) (pro se plaintiff who failed to provide any change of address waived right to review of report and recommendation by failing to make a timely objection). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 14] is ADOPTED in its entirety and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate judgment of dismissal shall be entered contemporaneously with this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED this 16" day of June, 2025. Jaz bop SCOTT L. PALK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

EDWARD R. BROWN, SR., ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. CIV-25-296-SLP ) STATE OF OKLAHOMA, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

O R D E R Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation (R&R) of United States Magistrate Judge Suzanne Mitchell [Doc. No. 14]. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with her Order to pay the initial partial filing fee [Doc. No. 12], his failure to comply with the Court’s rules, and his failure to pay the filing fee. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of his right to object to the R&R and directed that any objections be filed on or before June 12, 2025. [Doc. No. 14] at 5. To date, no objection has been filed, nor has an extension of time in which to object been sought or granted.1

1 The Court’s docket reflects that the R&R was returned in the mail as undeliverable even though it was mailed to Plaintiff’s address of record at the Comanche County Detention Center and the Oklahoma State Reformatory where prior orders in this action have been mailed. As noted by the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiff is responsible for providing notice of any change of address to the Court. See LCvR 5.4 (requiring written notice of a change of address and further providing that papers sent by the Court are “deemed delivered if sent to the last known address given to the court.”); see also Theede v. United States Dep’t of Labor, 172 F.3d 1262, 1267-68 (10th Cir. 1999) (pro se plaintiff who failed to provide any change of address waived right to review of report and recommendation by failing to make a timely objection). IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation [Doc. No. 14] is ADOPTED in its entirety and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate judgment of dismissal shall be entered contemporaneously with this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED this 16" day of June, 2025. Jaz bop SCOTT L. PALK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Brown v. Oklahoma State of, (W.D. Okla. 2025).

Pincite

Brown v. Oklahoma State of (Brown v. Oklahoma State of) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.