PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

JOE J. VOLPE, Magistrate Judge.

INSTRUCTIONS

The following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District Judge James M. Moody, Jr. Any party may serve and file written objections to this recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for the objection. If the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the evidence that supports your objection. An original and one copy of your objections must be received in the office of the United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen (14) days from the date of the findings and recommendations. The copy will be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely objections may result in a waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact.

If you are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit new, different, or additional evidence, and to have a new hearing for this purpose before either the District Judge or Magistrate Judge, you must, at the time you file your written objections, include the following:

1. Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is inadequate.

2. Why the evidence to be proffered at the new hearing (if such a hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing before the Magistrate Judge.

3. The details of any testimony desired to be introduced at the new hearing in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy or the original of any documentary or other non-testimonial evidence desired to be introduced at the new hearing.

From this submission, the District Judge will determine the necessity for an additional evidentiary hearing. Mail your objections and AStatement of Necessity@ to:

DISPOSITION

I. ANALYSIS

Tommy McGoogan ("Plaintiff") has filed a pro se Complaint and an Amended Complaint alleging Defendants violated his constitutional rights at the Grimes Unit. (Doc. Nos. 1, 4.) On November 13, 2018, I issued an Order granting Plaintiff in forma pauperis status, explaining his obligations under Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), and advising him of the consequences if he failed to abide by that rule.1 (Doc. No. 3.) Plaintiff received that Order.

On February 7, 2019, mail sent to Plaintiff was returned undeliverable because he had been paroled without providing a new address to the Clerk, as required by Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). (Doc. No. 24.) On the same day, I issued an Order giving Plaintiff thirty (30) days to provide his current mailing address to the Clerk and file another Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Affidavit demonstrating whether he was still entitled to proceed in forma pauperis after his release. (Doc. No. 25.) I warned Plaintiff that I would recommend dismissal if he did not timely do so. (Id.)

Plaintiff has not complied with my February 7, 2019 Order, and the time to do so has expired. Thus, I recommend this case be DISMISSED without prejudice due to a lack of prosecution.

II. CONCLUSION

IT IS, THEREFORE, RECOMMENDED THAT:

1. The case be DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).

2. The Court certify, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis appeal from an Order adopting this Recommendation and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith.