Terrance Phillips v. Oramadike, et al.

• Court: District Court, S.D. Texas
• Decided: December 16, 2025
• Docket: 4:25-cv-01143
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

Southern District of Texas ENTERED December 16, 2025 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT voiranoen athan Ochsner, Clerk SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

TERRANCE PHILLIPS, § SPN 02854962, § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. H-25-01143 § ORAMADIKE, et al., § § Defendants. §

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

At the time Terrance Phillips (SPN 02854962) filed this civil action, he was confined at the Harris County Jail. On October 10, 2025, the Court sent Phillips an Order for a More Definite Statement. Doc. No. 11. On December 8, 2025, the Court’s Order for a More Definite Statement was returned to sender, with a notation that there was “no such number” associated with the address that Phillips had provided to the Court. Doc. No. 12. Phillips has not provided the Court with a current, valid address as required by Rule 83.4 of the Local Rules for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. Under that rule, a pro se litigant is responsible for keeping the Clerk advised in writing of his current address. The Court will only send notices to the address on file. The plaintiffhas clearly failed to provide the Court with an accurate, current address.

1/2

The plaintiff's failure to pursue this action leads the Court to conclude that he lacks due diligence. Therefore, under the inherent powers necessarily vested in a district court to manage its own affairs, this Court determines that dismissal for want of prosecution is appropriate. See FED. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 489 (2000) (stating that “[t]he failure to comply with an order of the court is grounds for dismissal with prejudice’); Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030 (Sth Cir. 1998) (noting that a district court

may sua sponte dismiss an action for failure to comply with any court order). The plaintiff is advised, however, that relief from this Order may be granted upon a

proper showing by filing a motion under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure within 30 days of this Order. At a minimum, a proper showing under Rule 60(b) includes full compliance with the Court’s previous notices or orders, including submitting a completed response to the Court’s Order for a More Definite Statement and providing a current, valid address pursuant to the Local Rules. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the Court ORDERS that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for want of prosecution. SIGNED on this | G ~ of December 2025.

ANDREW S. HANEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2/2