Gomez v. Francis DelGrosso ( 2020 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT □ SOCUMENT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SLECTRONICALLY FILED nn etme me mm mmm mK ‘ROC Ho SANTIAGO GOMEZ, “DATE rien J a ____| Plaintiff, : cee J ORDER WARDEN FRANCIS DELGROSSO, SERGEANT: 19 CV 1335 (VB) HOGUE, and SERGEANT MARTINEZ, : Defendants. : 8 Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, commenced this action by filing a complaint dated February 12, 2019. (Doc. #2). On February 10, 2020, the Court issued an Opinion and Order granting in part and denying in part defendants’ motions to dismiss. (Doc. #47). The Court mailed the Opinion and Order and Notice of Initial Conference to plaintiff at the address on the docket. (Doc. #48). On March 2, 2020, the Court received notice that its Opinion and Order and Notice of Initial Conference were returned as undeliverable with the following notation: “Return to sender—Box Closed. No Order.” As the Court stated in its Order of Service dated March 14, 2019 (Doc. #6), it is plaintiff’s responsibility to notify the Court in writing if his address changes, and the Court may dismiss the action if plaintiff fails to do so. Accordingly, by March 23, 2020, plaintiff must update the Court in writing as to his current address, Failure to comply with the Court’s Order may result in dismissal of the action for failure to prosecute or comply with Court orders. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purposes of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order to plaintiff at the address on the docket. Dated: March 2, 2020 White Plains, NY SO Vincent L.Briccetti United States District Judge