ORDER

J. LEON HOLMES, District Judge.

Plaintiff Tyler Antonio King filed a pro se complaint, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, on January 19, 2018. Document #1. Mail sent to King by the Court was returned as undeliverable, and the envelope was entered on the docket. See Document #16. On April 30, 2018, the Court entered a text order notifying King that the mail could not be delivered to him because he was no longer at the address he provided. See Document #17. King was directed to provide notice of his current mailing address by no later than thirty days from the entry of the April 30, 2018 text order. He was warned that his failure to provide a current mailing address would cause his complaint to be dismissed. A printed version of the text order was sent to him at his last known address. The envelope containing the text order could not be delivered to King because he was no longer at the address he provided, and the envelope was returned to the Clerk of the Court and entered on the docket. See Document #18.

More than 30 days have passed, and King has not complied or otherwise responded to the April 30 order. King also failed to notify the Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of a change in his address as required by Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). Accordingly, the Court finds that this action should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) and failure to respond to the Court's orders. See Miller v. Benson, 51 F.3d 166, 168 (8th Cir. 1995) (district courts have inherent power to dismiss sua sponte a case for failure to prosecute, and exercise of that power is reviewed for abuse of discretion).

It is therefore ordered that King's complaint (Document #1) is dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.