PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

PATRICIA S. HARRIS, Magistrate Judge.

INSTRUCTIONS

The following Proposed Findings and Recommendation have been sent to United States District Judge D.P. Marshall Jr. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact.

DISPOSITION

Plaintiffs JaQuale Mitchell, Shelly Gibson, and Torrence Dukes filed a pro se complaint on January 27, 2015. Judge Marshall dismissed Gibson's and Dukes's claims without prejudice on May 11, 2015 (docket entry 17).

On October 5, 2015, mail sent to Mitchell at his address of record at the Arkansas Department of Correction's Delta Regional Unit was returned as undeliverable. In response, the Court entered an order directing him to file a notice of his current address within 30 days, and warning him that his failure to do so would result in the recommended dismissal of his complaint (docket entry 27). Because a notation on the returned mail indicated that Mitchell might have been moved to the Ouachita River Correctional Unit, the Court entered another order on December 8, 2015, giving him an additional 30 days to update his address, and sent the order to Mitchell at his address of record, and at the Ouachita River Correctional Unit (docket entry 29). Mitchell was again warned that his failure to comply would result in the recommended dismissal of his complaint. More than 30 days have passed, and Mitchell has not updated his address or otherwise responded to the order. Under these circumstances, the Court concludes that Mitchell's claims should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), and failure to respond to the Court's order. 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). Because the other plaintiffs' claims have already been dismissed, the case should be dismissed in its entirety, and all pending motions should be denied as moot.

IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT:

1. Plaintiff's complaint be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, and all pending motions be DENIED AS MOOT.

2. The Court additionally certify, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from this order or any judgment entered hereunder, would not be taken in good faith.