Lewis v. IDOC

• Court: District Court, S.D. Illinois
• Decided: January 31, 2022
• Docket: 3:21-cv-01427
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

DARRION I. LEWIS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 3:21-cv-01427-DWD ) IDOC, et al., ) ) Defendants. )

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

DUGAN, District Judge:

This matter comes before the Court for case management purposes. Plaintiff filed a civil rights Complaint with the Court on November 15, 2021 (Doc. 1). The same day the court mailed a Notice and Order (Doc. 3) and Notice from Clerk (Doc. 4) to Plaintiff at the address he provided at the St. Clair County Jail (“SCCJ”). Subsequently, the Court mailed additional documents to Plaintiff at SCCJ (Docs. 5, 7). The documents have been returned as undeliverable with notations that Plaintiff is no longer in SCCJ custody (Docs. 8, 10, 11, 12, 14). Plaintiff has not updated his address with the Court or filed any documents since he filed the Complaint. On December 20, 2021, the Court issued an Order to Show Cause within thirty (30) days of the date of the Order why this case should not be dismissed for his failure to prosecute the case (Doc. 13). The deadline has passed and Plaintiff has not complied with the Court’s Order or requested an extension of time. SDIL Local Rule 3.1 (b) requires Plaintiff to keep the Clerk of Court informed of any change in his address. Plaintiff is responsible for maintaining communication with the court concerning his suit and has not done so. See Buchanan v. Weaver, 657 F. App'x 588, 590 (7th Cir. 2016) (citing see Soliman v. Johanns, 412 F.3d 920, 922 (8th Cir. 2005); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1441 (9th Cir. 1988). Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court’s Order and failure to prosecute his claim. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to enter final judgment and to close this case. Plaintiff is ADVISED that his obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was incurred at the time the action was filed, thus the filing fee remains due and payable. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998). IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: January 31, 2022 A. Li i DAVIDW.DUGAN United States District Judge