Free Order Dismissing Case - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 On February 12, 2004, Plaintiff pro se filed a complaint alleging violation of civil rights and retaliation. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff sued the State of Arizona Department of Corrections and other defendants unknown. On October 15, 2004, Defendant Arizona Department of Corrections filed a motion to dismiss the complaint based on insufficient service of process under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(5). (Doc. 9). On April 12, 2005, the Court denied Defendant's motion to dismiss for insufficient service and afforded Plaintiff an additional sixty (60) days to properly effect service of the summons and complaint. (Doc. 14). Based upon a failure to show return of service, the Court set the matter for a show cause hearing at which time Plaintiff was ordered to be present and show cause why the case should not be dismissed for lack of service. (Doc. 16). The docket sheet shows that the show cause minute order was mailed to Plaintiff with no indication that it was returned as undeliverable. Plaintiff failed to appear at the show cause hearing held on August 8, 2005. (Doc. 17). A copy of the
Case 2:04-cv-00319-MHM Document 20 Filed 08/30/2005 Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Robin L.A. Jopling, Plaintiff, vs. State of Arizona Corrections, et al., Defendants. Department

) ) ) ) ) ) ) of) ) ) ) ) )

No. CV 04-0319-PHX-MHM ORDER

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

minute order noting Plaintiff's failure to appear was mailed to Plaintiff. The docket sheet shows that this mail was returned as undeliverable. (Doc. 19).\ Plaintiff has failed to timely effect proper service of the summons and complaint and failed to appear at the August 8, 2005 show cause hearing. Plaintiff further has failed to keep the Court informed as to her current address. This cause is dismissed for failure to prosecute. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). Dismissal shall be without prejudice. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the complaint is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. DATED this 25th day of August, 2005.

-2Case 2:04-cv-00319-MHM Document 20 Filed 08/30/2005 Page 2 of 2