Valentine v. Nix

          REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

          SHIVA V. HODGES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

         Johnny S. Valentine, II (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this action alleging violations of his civil rights. All pretrial proceedings in this case were referred to the undersigned pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d) (D.S.C.). On January 14, 2019, the undersigned issued an order denying Defendant Carver's motion to quash in this case, and the Clerk of Court placed it in the mail to Plaintiff on the same day. [ECF Nos. 29, 31]. On January 24, 2019, the order was returned to the Clerk's office with the envelope marked “Return to Sender, ” “Unclaimed, ” and “Unable to Forward.” [ECF No. 32]. It does not appear Plaintiff is still in the custody of the South Carolina Department of Corrections (“SCDC”).^[1]

         Plaintiff was previously ordered to keep the court apprised of any change in his address:

You are ordered to always keep the Clerk of Court advised in writing (United States District Court, 901 Richland Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201) if your address changes for any reason, so as to assure that orders or other matters that specify deadlines for you to meet will be received by you. If as a result of your failure to comply with this order, you fail to meet a deadline set by this court, your case may be dismissed for violating this order. Therefore, if you have a change of address before this case is ended, you must comply with this order by immediately advising the Clerk of Court in writing of such change of address and providing the court with the docket number of all pending cases you have filed with this court. Your failure to do so will not be excused by the court.

[ECF No. 13]. Plaintiff has not notified the court of any change of address. Plaintiff has failed to comply with the court's order, and as a result, neither the court nor Defendants have any means of contacting him concerning his case.

         Based on the foregoing, it is recommended that this action be dismissed in accordance with Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). The Clerk is directed to send this Report and Recommendation to Plaintiff at his last known address. If Plaintiff notifies the court within the time set for filing objections to this Report and Recommendation that he wishes to continue with this case and provides a current address, the Clerk is directed to vacate this Report and Recommendation and return the file to the undersigned for further handling. If, however, no objections are filed, the Clerk shall forward this Report and Recommendation to the district judge for disposition.

         IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.

         The parties are directed to note the important information in the attached “Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation.”

         Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation

         The parties are advised that they may file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation with the District Judge. Objections must specifically identify the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made and the basis for such objections. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note).

         Specific written objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); see Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a), (d). Filing by mail pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 may be accomplished by mailing objections to:

Robin L. Blume, Clerk United States District Court 901 Richland Street Columbia, South Carolina 29201

         Failure to timely file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation will result in waiver of the right to appeal from a judgment of the District Court based upon such Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 7 ...