Marshall (ID 2000092873) v. Kansas Department of Corrections et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
LAWRENCE D. MARSHALL,
Plaintiff,
v. 	CASE NO. 26-3004-JWL
KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
NOTICE AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Plaintiff Lawrence D. Marshall began this pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action on January 6,
2026. (Doc. 1.) When Plaintiff filed his complaint (Doc. 1) and his motion for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis (Doc. 2), he was incarcerated at Lansing Correctional Facility (“LCF”) in Lansing,
Kansas. (Doc. 1, p. 1.) Plaintiff did not provide the financial statement required to support his
motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (see Doc. 2-1) and, in light of the information
provided by Plaintiff, the Court granted him additional time to do so (see Docs. 5 and 6). The
memorandum and order granting Plaintiff to and including March 5, 2026 in which to file the
inmate account statement was filed on February 2, 2026 and was mailed to Plaintiff at LCF the
same day. (Doc. 6.)
On February 24, 2026, the memorandum and order was returned to the Court; the envelope
was marked “Return to Sender[;] Not Deliverable as Addressed[;] Unable to Forward.” (Doc. 7.)
A handwritten notation on the envelope states: “Wichita – Parole.” Id. The Clerk of this Court
discovered that Plaintiff was—at that time—listed as an inmate on the website of the Sedgwick
Case 5:26-cv-03004-JWL Document 8 Filed 03/09/26 Page 1 of 2

2
County Sheriff’s Office, so the memorandum and order was remailed to Plaintiff at the Sedgwick
County Jail. Id.
The deadline for Plaintiff to provide his inmate account statement was now passed and the
Court has received nothing from Plaintiff since his January 23, 2026 motion for extension of time
to submit the statement. Moreover, Plaintiff does not appear on the Sedgwick County Jail’s current
in-custody list and the available information from the Kansas Department of Corrections’ website
reflects that he has absconded. Consequently, it appears that Plaintiff has failed to comply with
rules of the Court which require every party, including a party proceeding pro se, to notify the
Court in writing of a change of address. See D. Kan. R. 5.1(b)(3) (“Each attorney or pro se party
must notify the clerk of any change of address or telephone number.”).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted until and including March 30,
2026 to show cause why this matter should not be dismissed without prejudice for lack of
prosecution. The failure to file a timely response may result in the dismissal of this matter without
prior notice to Plaintiff. A copy of this order shall be transmitted to Plaintiff at his address of
record.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated on this 9th day of March, 2026, in Kansas City, Kansas.
s/ John W. Lungstrum
JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM
United States District Judge
Case 5:26-cv-03004-JWL Document 8 Filed 03/09/26 Page 2 of 2