UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
March 29, 2012
CAPTAIN MERCED, ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: John G. Koeltl, District Judge:
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
The telephone conference that was scheduled for today has been adjourned sine die.
The Court has received the attached letter, which it forwards to the Plaintiff.
The defendant asserts that the plaintiff is no longer incarcerated, and that the plaintiff has failed to update the Court or the defendant with his contact information.
"The case cannot proceed without a current address for the plaintiff and the failure to maintain such an address with the Court is a ground for failure to prosecute." Laney v. Ramirez, No. 10 Civ. 9063, 2011 WL 6594491, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 22, 2011) (collecting cases); see generally LeSane v. Hall's Sec. Analyst, Inc., 239 F.3d 206, 209 (2d Cir. 2001) ("[I]t is unquestioned that Rule 41(b) [of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure] also gives the district court authority to dismiss a plaintiff's case . . . for failure to prosecute.").
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.