Henley v. Barren County Detention Center

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM OPINION by Judge Greg N. Stivers. For the reasons herein, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case, and the Court will dismiss the action by separate Order. cc: Plaintiff, pro se (JLS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
BOWLING GREEN DIVISION
DEVON LOVELL HENLEY

PLAINTIFF

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16CV-P9-GNS

BARREN COUNTY DETENTION CENTER et al.

DEFENDANTS

MEMORANDUM OPINION
On February 29, 2016, the Notice of Deficiency sent to Plaintiff was returned to the Court
by the United States Postal Service with the returned envelope marked “Return to Sender,” “Not
Deliverable as Addressed,” and “Unable to Forward” (DN 5). A handwritten notation on the
envelope indicated “RTS Not Here.”
Upon filing the instant action, Plaintiff assumed the responsibility to keep this Court
advised of his current address and to actively litigate his claims. See Local Rule 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.”). Over a month has passed without
Plaintiff providing any notice of an address change. Therefore, neither orders from this Court nor
filings by Defendants can be served on him.
Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes the involuntary dismissal
of an action if a plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with an order of the court. See Jourdan
v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 109 (6th Cir. 1991) (“Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) recognizes the power of the
district court to enter a sua sponte order of dismissal.”). “Further, the United States Supreme

Court has recognized that courts have an inherent power to manage their own affairs and may
dismiss a case sua sponte for lack of prosecution.” Lyons-Bey v. Pennell, 93 F. App’x 732, 733
(6th Cir. 2004) (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962)).
Plaintiff having failed to file a notice of change of address, the Court concludes that he
has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case, and the Court will dismiss the action by
separate Order.
Date:

April 14, 2016

Greg N. Stivers, Judge
United States District Court
cc:
Plaintiff, pro se
4416.005

2