Grimes v. Higgins

• Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
• Decided: January 27, 2025
• Docket: 4:23-cv-01114
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

JOHN GRIMES, SR. PLAINTIFF ADC #113240

v. Case No: 4:23-cv-01114-JM-PSH

ERIC HIGGINS, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Plaintiff John Grimes, Sr. filed a pro se complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, on November 21, 2023 (Doc. No. 2). In its initial order to Grimes, the Court notified him of his duty to promptly notify the Clerk and the parties of any change in his address; the Court also notified Grimes that if any communication from the Court to him is not responded to within 30 days, his case may be dismissed without prejudice. See Doc. No. 3. On December 5, 2024, the Court entered a text order directing Grimes to provide notice of his current mailing address by no later than thirty days from the entry of the December 5 text order (Doc. No. 30). He was warned that his failure to provide a current mailing address may cause his complaint to be dismissed. A printed version of the text order was sent to him at his address of record but was returned as undeliverable. See Doc. No. 32. Grimes has not complied with or otherwise responded to the December 5 order, and the time to do so has passed. Accordingly, the Court finds that this action should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) and failure to respond to the Court’s orders. See Miller v. Benson, 51 F.3d 166, 168 (8th Cir. 1995) (District courts have inherent power to dismiss sua sponte a case for failure to prosecute, and exercise of that power is reviewed for abuse of discretion). It is therefore ordered that Grimes’s complaint is dismissed without prejudice. DATED this 27th day of January, 2025.

UNI L MY | JUDGE