IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

MATTHEW ROBERTS, PLAINTIFF #161985

v. 4:22CV00788-KGB-JTK

JOHN STALEY, et al. DEFENDANTS

ORDER After screening Matthew Roberts’s (“Plaintiff”) amended Complaint (Doc. No. 4) pursuant to the Prison Litigation Reform Act,1 the Court ordered service of Plaintiff’s claims against Defendants Staley, Flud, McCoy, and Merritt. (Doc. No. 5). On November 18, 2022, summonses for Defendants McCoy, Flud, and Merritt were returned unexecuted. (Doc. Nos. 12- 14). The process receipt and return for Defendant McCoy indicates he retired. (Doc. No. 12). The process receipt and return for Defendant Flud indicates she has a new job. (Doc. No. 13). The process receipt and return for Defendant Merritt was returned with no additional comment. (Doc. No. 14). The Court cannot serve these Defendants without a valid address for service. It is Plaintiff’s responsibility to provide a service address for Defendants McCoy, Flud, and Merritt. See Lee v. Armontrout,

(8th Cir. 1993) (per curiam); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 4(m) (any defendant not served within ninety (90) days after the filing of the Complaint is subject to dismissal without prejudice). Plaintiff is directed to provide the Court an address for service for Defendants McCoy, Flud, and Merritt within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order. If

1 The Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) requires federal courts to screen prisoner complaints seeking relief against a governmental entity, officer, or employee. 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). Plaintiff does not do so, and if Defendants McCoy, Flud, and Merritt are not served, the Court will recommend Plaintiff's claims against them be dismissed without prejudice. LOCAL RULE 5.5(c)(2); FED. R. Civ. P. 4(m). IT IS SO ORDERED this 23" day of November, 2022. -

JEROME T. KEARNEY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE