RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CHARLES S. COODY, Magistrate Judge.

LeMichael Williams ["Williams"], a state inmate, initiated this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging a violation of his constitutional rights during his incarceration at the Kilby Correctional Facility. The order of procedure entered in this case specifically directed Williams to immediately inform the court of any change in his address. Order of March 7, 2012 — Doc. No. 5 at 5.

This court recently received information establishing the plaintiff is no longer at the address he last provided for service. In light of the foregoing, the court entered an order requiring that on or before May 14, 2012 Williams inform the court of his present address. May 3, 2012 Order — Doc. No. 11. The order specifically advised Williams this case could not proceed if his whereabouts remained unknown and cautioned him his failure to comply with its directives would result in a Recommendation that this case be dismissed. Id. The court has received no response from Williams to the aforementioned order nor has he provided the court with his current address as required by the order of procedure.

As is clear from the foregoing, Williams has failed to comply with the directives of the orders entered by this court and this case cannot properly proceed in his absence. It likewise appears Williams is no longer interested in the prosecution of this case. The court therefore concludes this case is due to be dismissed.

CONCLUSION

Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case be dismissed without prejudice for failure of the plaintiff to comply with the orders of this court and his failure to prosecute this action.

It is further

ORDERED that on or before June 6, 2012, the parties may file objections to the Recommendation. Any objections filed must specifically identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which the party is objecting. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable.

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and advisements in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District Court of issues covered in the Recommendation and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual findings in the Recommendation accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982). See Stein v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981, en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on September 30, 1981.