RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

WALLACE CAPEL, Jr., Magistrate Judge.

This pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action was filed by Plaintiff on June 26, 2013. At the time he filed this complaint, Plaintiff was incarcerated at the Geneva County Jail located in Geneva, Alabama.

On July 9, 2013, the envelopes containing Plaintiff's copies of a Recommendation and orders filed June 28, 2013 were returned to the court marked as undeliverable because Plaintiff is no longer at the address he provided to the court when he filed the instant complaint. Consequently, the court entered an order, on July 9, 2013, directing Plaintiff to provide the court with his present address on or before July 19, 2013. (Doc. No. 7.) Plaintiff was cautioned that his failure to comply with the court's July 9 order would result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. (Id.) Plaintiff's copy of the court's July 9 order was returned to the court marked as undeliverable.

As it appears clear that Plaintiff is no longer residing at the most recent service address he provided to the court and that he has not provided this court with a new address for service, the undersigned concludes that dismissal of the complaint is appropriate.

Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failures to prosecute this action properly and to comply with the orders of this court.

It is further

ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to file any objections to the Recommendation on or before August 6, 2013. Any objections filed must specifically identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which a party objects. 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 Sec., 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).