PULLIAM v. TRUMAN, 3:14-CV-P397-JHM. (2015)
Court: District Court, W.D. Kentucky
Number: infdco20150109704
Visitors: 1
Filed: Jan. 08, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 08, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION JOSEPH H. McKINLEY, Jr., Chief District Judge. Upon filing the instant action, Plaintiff assumed the responsibility of keeping this Court advised of his current address and to actively litigate his claims. See LR 5.2(d) ("All pro se litigants must provide written notice of a change of address to the clerk and to the opposing party or the opposing party's counsel. Failure to notify the Clerk of an address change may result in the dismissal of the litigant's case or other ap
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION JOSEPH H. McKINLEY, Jr., Chief District Judge. Upon filing the instant action, Plaintiff assumed the responsibility of keeping this Court advised of his current address and to actively litigate his claims. See LR 5.2(d) ("All pro se litigants must provide written notice of a change of address to the clerk and to the opposing party or the opposing party's counsel. Failure to notify the Clerk of an address change may result in the dismissal of the litigant's case or other app..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JOSEPH H. McKINLEY, Jr., Chief District Judge.
Upon filing the instant action, Plaintiff assumed the responsibility of keeping this Court advised of his current address and to actively litigate his claims. See LR 5.2(d) ("All pro se litigants must provide written notice of a change of address to the clerk and to the opposing party or the opposing party's counsel. Failure to notify the Clerk of an address change may result in the dismissal of the litigant's case or other appropriate sanctions.").
The Court sent an Order to Plaintiff on September 10, 2014. That Order was returned by the United States Postal Service marked "Return to Sender; Attempted Not Known; Unable to Forward." Plaintiff has not advised the Court of a change of address, and neither notices from this Court nor filings by Defendants in this action can be served on Plaintiff. In such situations, courts have an inherent power "acting on their own initiative, to clear their calendars of cases that have remained dormant because of the inaction or dilatoriness of the parties seeking relief." Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630 (1962). Because it appears to this Court that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecution of this case, the Court will dismiss the case by separate Order.
Source: Leagle
