Geddes v. Leeke, 1:12-cv-01559

Geddes filed a civil rights action in the District of South Carolina as part of a multi-plaintiff case proceeding pro se.
The court ordered separation for initial review and required full filing fees or in forma pauperis status for each plaintiff.
A June 11, 2012 order directed separation and fee/payment requirements; Geddes was notified of the order.
A June 25, 2012 order was returned undelivered to Geddes, and he failed to update his contact information.
Because Geddes could not be reached, the magistrate judge recommended dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(b).
If Geddes later provides current contact information and files objections timely, the report may be vacated and the case returned for further handling.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the case should be dismissed for failure to prosecute.	Geddes would proceed if contact information is updated.	Geddes failed to provide current contact details; dismissal is warranted.	Dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(b).

Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (standard for timely objections and non-de novo review by district court)
Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985) (notice of objections procedures and standards)
Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985) (procedural guidelines for objections)
United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984) (time deadlines and course of objections)