Cleveland v. Barratti et al
ORDER ENTERED: This matter is dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Signed by U.S. Senior District Judge Sam A. Crow on 9/9/2021. Mailed to pro se party Edgar W. Cleveland by regular mail. (jal)
Case 5:21-cv-03073-SAC Document 8 Filed 09/09/21 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
EDGAR W. CLEVELAND,
CASE NO. 21-3073-SAC
CHRISTOPHER BARRATTI, et al.,
Plaintiff Edgar W. Cleveland filed this pro se § 1983 action against Detective Christopher
Barratti, Officer Thomas Bangert, Comcare Case Manager Rebecca (lnu), and an unnamed “male
counselor of Carolyn Sebbos.” (Doc. 1, p. 1.)
When Mr. Cleveland filed his complaint and his motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis on March 10, 2021, he indicated that his return address was the Cherokee County Jail.
Id. The envelope containing the complaint had a return address of the mailing address for the
Cherokee County Jail. (Doc. 1-1.) Similarly, when Mr. Cleveland filed his motion to waive partial
filing fee on March 25, 2021, the envelope containing the motion had a return address of the
mailing address for the Cherokee County Jail. (Doc. 4-1.) Mr. Cleveland has filed nothing further
in this case.
Mr. Cleveland does not appear on the Cherokee County Jail’s current in-custody list, and
he has not provided the Court with his new address. Consequently, it appears Mr. Cleveland 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. D. Kan. R. 5.1(c).
Case 5:21-cv-03073-SAC Document 8 Filed 09/09/21 Page 2 of 2
The Court issued a notice and order to show cause dated July 30, 2021 (Doc. 6) directing
Plaintiff to provide his current address and show cause why this matter should not be dismissed
without prejudice. Plaintiff has not responded to the order, and the copy of the order mailed to
him was returned to the Court.
Under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a district court may dismiss an
action “if the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order.” Fed. R.
Civ. P. 41(b). After a review of the record, the Court concludes this matter should be dismissed
pursuant to Rule 41(b). The dismissal shall be without prejudice. A dismissal without prejudice
allows Plaintiff to refile the action if he either obtains the filing fee or can provide the financial
information required to support a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, so long as the
limitation period has not expired.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this matter is dismissed without prejudice for
failure to comply with a court order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated on this 9th day of September, 2021, in Topeka, Kansas.
s/ Sam A. Crow
SAM A. CROW
U. S. Senior District Judge
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?