United States District Court, E.D. Arkansas, Eastern Division
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
VOLPE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
following recommended disposition has been sent to United
States District Judge James M. Moody, Jr. Any party may serve
and file written objections to this recommendation.
Objections should be specific and should include the factual
or legal basis for the objection. If the objection is to a
factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the
evidence that supports your objection. An original and one
copy of your objections must be received in the office of the
United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen
(14) days from the date of the findings and recommendations.
The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to
file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to
appeal questions of fact.
are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit
new, different, or additional evidence, and to have a hearing
for this purpose before the District Judge, you must, at the
same time that you file your written objections, include the
1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is
2. Why the evidence proffered at the hearing (if such a
hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing before the
3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at
the new hearing in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy,
or the original, of any documentary or other non-testimonial
evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing.
this submission, the District Judge will determine the
necessity for an additional evidentiary hearing. Mail your
objections and “Statement of Necessity” to:
Clerk, United States District Court Eastern District of
Arkansas 600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 Little Rock, AR
Thomas Parks (“Plaintiff”) was confined in the
Prairie County Jail when he commenced this pro se
action, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. No. 2.) On
January 28, 2019, I granted Plaintiff in forma
pauperis status, explained his obligations under Local
Rule 5.5(c)(2), and advised him of the consequences if he
failed to abide by that rule. (Doc. No. 4.)
mail sent to Plaintiff was returned undeliverable because he
had been released from custody without providing a new
address to the Clerk, as required by Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).
(Doc. No. 7.) On March 25, 2019, I gave Plaintiff thirty (30)
days to provide his current mailing address to the Clerk and
to file another Application to Proceed In Forma
Pauperis (“IFP Application) demonstrating whether
he was still entitled to proceed in forma pauperis
after his release. (Doc. No. 9.) I warned Plaintiff his case
would be dismissed if he did not timely do so. (Id.)
Plaintiff provided the Court with a new mailing address, but
he did not file an IFP Application. (Doc. No. 17.) On April
23, 2019, I ordered the Clerk to send Plaintiff another IFP
Application at his new address and warned him that I would
recommend dismissal of this case if he failed to file it or
pay the filing fee in full within thirty (30) days. (Doc. No.
20.) My Order, as well as several other pleadings, have been
returned undeliverable at the address provided by Plaintiff.
(Doc. No. 25.)
time for Plaintiff to file a new IFP Application has expired.
He has been advised of his obligation to maintain a current
mailing address with the Clerk and warned of the consequences
for failing to timely respond to Court orders. Thus, I