IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS TEXARKANA DIVISION

BRANDON WADE QUALLS PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 4:21-cv-04017

WARDEN JEFFIE WALKER, Miller County Detention Center; CAPTAIN GOLDEN ADAMS, Miller County Detention Center; HEAD NURSE STEVEN KING, Southern Health Partners, Inc.; and SHERIFF JACKIE RUNION DEFENDANTS

ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s failure to obey a Court Order and prosecute this action. This is a civil rights action filed pursuant to

. On March 9, 2021, Plaintiff filed his complaint and proceeded pro se and in forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF Nos. 1, 2, 3. In the Court’s Order granting Plaintiff’s application for IFP status, Plaintiff was advised “that he is required to immediately inform the Court of any change of address” within 30 days. ECF No. 3. The Order further states: “[f]ailure to inform the Court of an address change shall result in the dismissal of this case.”

On May 10, 2021, mail addressed to the Plaintiff was returned to the Court marked “return to sender, not deliverable as addressed, unable to forward.” ECF No. 24. Mail addressed to the Plaintiff was again returned to the Court on May 24, 2021. ECF No. 25. As of the date of this order, the Court has not received a new address for Plaintiff. Although pro se pleadings are to be construed liberally, a pro se litigant is not excused from complying with substantive and procedural law. Burgs v. Sissel,

(8th Cir. 1984). The Local Rules state in pertinent part: It is the duty of any party not represented by counsel to promptly notify the Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of any change in his or her address, to monitor the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently . . . If any communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is not responded to within thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed without prejudice. Any party proceeding pro se shall be expected to be familiar with and follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).

More than thirty (30) days have passed since mail sent to Plaintiff at his address of record was returned as undeliverable. Plaintiff has failed to keep the Court informed of his current address and failed to prosecute this case. Therefore, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), the Court finds that this case should be dismissed. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 7) should be, and hereby is, be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS SO ORDERED, this 4th day of August, 2021. /s/ Susan O. Hickey Susan O. Hickey Chief United States District Judge