Odom v. Kelley, 3:17-cv-P118-DJH. (2019)
Court: District Court, W.D. Kentucky
Number: infdco20190416c63
Visitors: 11
Filed: Apr. 15, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 15, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM DAVID J. HALE , 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(e) ("All pro se litigants must provide written notice of a change of residential address, and, if different, mailing 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
Summary: MEMORANDUM DAVID J. HALE , 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(e) ("All pro se litigants must provide written notice of a change of residential address, and, if different, mailing 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 t..
More
MEMORANDUM
DAVID J. HALE, 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(e) ("All pro se litigants must provide written notice of a change of residential address, and, if different, mailing 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 a document to Plaintiff on February 20, 2019. That document was returned to the Court by the U.S. Postal Service marked "Return to Sender" on March 7, 2019. Another document sent by the Court was returned for being undeliverable on March 25, 2019.
Plaintiff has not advised the Court of his new address, and documents from this Court and Defendants in this action cannot 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
