ROGERS v. AMERICAN RED CROSS, 4:11-cv-892-DPM. (2012)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20120727691
Visitors: 11
Filed: Jul. 26, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 26, 2012
Summary: ORDER D.P. MARSHALL, Jr., District Judge. When the Clerk mailed Rogers the Court's most recent order, it was returned as undeliverable. Document No. 32. Rogers, as a pro se plaintiff, has a duty" to promptly notify the Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of any change in his ... address, to monitor the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently." Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). In its earlier order, the Court gave Rogers until 1 August 2012 to file his revised
Summary: ORDER D.P. MARSHALL, Jr., District Judge. When the Clerk mailed Rogers the Court's most recent order, it was returned as undeliverable. Document No. 32. Rogers, as a pro se plaintiff, has a duty" to promptly notify the Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of any change in his ... address, to monitor the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently." Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). In its earlier order, the Court gave Rogers until 1 August 2012 to file his revised a..
More
ORDER
D.P. MARSHALL, Jr., District Judge.
When the Clerk mailed Rogers the Court's most recent order, it was returned as undeliverable. Document No. 32. Rogers, as a pro se plaintiff, has a duty" to promptly notify the Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of any change in his ... address, to monitor the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently." Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). In its earlier order, the Court gave Rogers until 1 August 2012 to file his revised amended complaint. Document No. 31. This deadline stands. But if the Court has not heard from Rogers by 27 August 2012, then it will dismiss his case without prejudice. Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).
So Ordered.
Source: Leagle
