UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

SHREVEPORT DIVISION

DERRICK TAVON HOLDEN CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-1436-P

VERSUS JUDGE HICKS

KAYLYNN REMEDIES, ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION In accordance with the standing order of this court, this matter was referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for review, report and recommendation. STATEMENT OF CLAIM Before the court is a civil rights complaint filed in forma pauperis by pro se plaintiff Derrick Tavon Holden (“Plaintiff”), pursuant to

. This complaint was received and filed in this court on October 17, 2024. Plaintiff was incarcerated at the Sabine Parish Detention Center in Many, Louisiana, when he filed this complaint. He names KayLynn Remedies, Berlion Sweet, and Aaron Mitchell as defendants. This court granted Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis and denied his motion to appoint counsel on October 30, 2024 [Docs. 4 and 5]. However, both orders were returned to this court on November 21, 2024, by the United States Postal Service marked “RETURN TO SENDER - NO MAIL RECEPTACLE - UNABLE TO FORWARD.” To date, Plaintiff has not informed this court of his new address. Accordingly; IT IS RECOMMENDED that this complaint be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, sua sponte, for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as interpreted by the court and under the court's inherent power

to control its own docket. See Link v. Wabash Railroad Company,

,

(1962); Rogers v. Kroger Company,

(5th Cir. 1982). OBJECTIONS Under the provisions of

(b)(1)(C) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), parties aggrieved by this recommendation have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report and

Recommendation to file specific, written objections with the Clerk of Court unless an extension of time is granted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). A party may respond to another party’s objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Counsel are directed to furnish a courtesy copy of any objections or responses to the District Judge at the time of filing.

A party’s failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation set forth above, within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the proposed factual findings and legal conclusions that were accepted by the district court and that were not objected to by the aforementioned party. See Douglas v. U.S.A.A.,

(5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

Page 2 of 3 THUS DONE AND SIGNED, in chambers, at Shreveport, Louisiana, on this 14th day of January 2025.

Mark L. Hornsby U.S. Magistrate Judge

Page 3 of 3