Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 13, 2023

Caraballo v. Department of Corrections City of New York

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:22-cv-00971
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
Civil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Caraballo v. Department of Corrections, Judge Rochon ordered an incarcerated plaintiff to update his address or face dismissal for failing to pursue the case.

Who this affects

David Caraballo, who was representing himself and incarcerated, was required to update his address to continue pursuing the action.

What happened

In Caraballo v. Department of Corrections City of New York, David Caraballo was representing himself while incarcerated. The court had previously dismissed his complaint but allowed him to file an amended complaint by January 10, 2023. Caraballo did not update his address or otherwise contact the court after moving to another facility.

The court ordered Caraballo to update his address within 30 days. It warned that if he did not comply, the court would dismiss the case without prejudice for failing to pursue it. The court directed the clerk to mail the order and the earlier dismissal order to Caraballo at the address listed in the court record and at his newer facility.

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon issued this order on March 13, 2023. The order did not dismiss the case; it gave Caraballo another opportunity to update his address before any dismissal for failure to pursue the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Caraballo v. Department of Corrections City of New York · No. 1:22-cv-00971
Judge
Rochon
Date
Mar. 13, 2023

Background

David Caraballo filed the action while representing himself and incarcerated at the Vernon C. Bain Center. On October 31, 2022, the court dismissed his complaint but gave him permission to amend it by January 10, 2023. The court stated that Caraballo was later listed as incarcerated at the George T. Bierno Center, but he had not updated his address or otherwise communicated with the court. The court therefore said it was unclear whether he intended to continue the action.

Court’s Order

The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits a district court to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute after notifying the plaintiff. It directed Caraballo to update his address of record within 30 days of the order. The court stated that, if he failed to comply, it would dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The court directed the clerk to mail the order and the October 31, 2022 order to Caraballo at the address on the docket and at the address for the George R. Vierno Center listed in the order.

Disposition

The court did not dismiss the action in this order. Instead, it issued a 30-day address-update directive and warned that noncompliance would lead to dismissal without prejudice. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon signed the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.