Lopez-Canada v. Carroll

CHARLES J. KAHN, JR. UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This matter is before the court upon defendants' Motion to Stay and Issue an Order to Show Cause. (Doc. 59). On July 30, 2015, the undersigned issued a report recommending that defendants' motion to dismiss be granted in part and denied in part. (Doc. 57). Within the report and recommendation, it was noted that plaintiff had been released from the custody of the Florida Department of Corrections and transferred to the custody of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE"). (Id., p. 1). Plaintiff is no longer listed as in ICE custody, indicating he has been deported to Mexico. See https://locator.ice.gov/odls/homePage.do. Mail sent to plaintiff's previous address at the Krome Service Processing Center was returned as undeliverable and marked "dep." (Docs. 61, 62). Defendants request that the court stay this matter and direct plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for plaintiff's failure to keep his address updated and failure to obey court orders. (Doc. 59). Based on the court's inability to contact plaintiff, the issuance of a show cause order would be futile. Thus, the undersigned recommends that plaintiff's remaining claims be dismissed without prejudice and defendants' Motion to Stay and Issue an Order to Show Cause be denied as moot.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

1. That this case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

2. That defendants' Motion to Stay and Issue an Order to Show Cause (doc. 59) be DENIED AS MOOT.

3. That the clerk be directed to close the file.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 1st day of December, 2015.

/s/ _________

CHARLES J. KAHN
, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations may be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court's internal use only, and does not control. A copy of objections shall be served upon the magistrate judge and all other parties. A party failing to object to a magistrate judge's findings or recommendations contained in a report and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See U.S. Ct. of App. 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.