IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COLUMBUS DIVISION

JAMES HAROLD BISHOP, JR., : : Plaintiff, : : v. : : No. 4:20-cv-00085-CDL-MSH Sheriff DONNA TOMPKINS, et al., : : Defendants. : : _________________________________:

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff James Harold Bishop, Jr., a pretrial detainee in the Muscogee County Jail in Columbus, Georgia, filed a pro se complaint under

, Compl., ECF No. 1, and a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Mot. for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, ECF No. 2. Thereafter, mail sent to Plaintiff at the Muscogee County Jail, the only address on file for Plaintiff, was returned to this Court as undeliverable. Mail Returned, ECF No. 5. Plaintiff’s failure to keep the Court apprised of his current address constitutes a failure to prosecute this case, and insofar as the Court has no information about Plaintiff’s current whereabouts, this action may not proceed.1 Thus, Plaintiff was previously ordered to respond and show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to keep the Court apprised of his current address. Order to Show Cause, ECF No. 6. Plaintiff was given twenty-one days to respond and was cautioned that his failure to do so would result

1Plaintiff currently has two additional cases pending in this Court, Bishop v. Tompkins, Case No. 4:20-cv-00032-CDL-MSH, and Bishop v. Tompkins, Case No. 4:20-cv-00033- CDL-MSH. The Muscogee County Jail is also the only address listed for Plaintiff in the other pending actions. in the dismissal of this action.

More than twenty-one days have now passed since the order to show cause was entered, and Plaintiff has not responded to that order. Indeed, the order was also returned to this Court as undeliverable, Mail Returned, ECF No. 7, and Plaintiff still has not provided any notice of a change of address to this Court. Thus, because Plaintiff has failed to keep the Court apprised of his current address or otherwise prosecute his case, his complaint is now DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Brown v Tallahassee Police Dep’t,

(11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) and Lopez v. Aransas Cty. Indep. Sch. Dist.,

(5th Cir. 1978)). SO ORDERED, this 9th day of July, 2020.

_s/Clay D. Land_______________ CLAY D. LAND U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

2