Johnson v. Eddie et al

Filing 6

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 7/2/12; 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.cc: Plaintiff, pro se(DAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12CV-218-H

PONNELL JOHNSON

PLAINTIFF

v.
EDDIE et al.

DEFENDANTS
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff Ponnell Johnson initiated this pro se civil action. Upon filing the instant action,
he 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.”).
On May 8, 2012, the Court entered an Order granting Plaintiff’s application to proceed
without the prepayment of fees, and the Clerk of Court sent a mailing of the Order to Plaintiff.
On May 30, 2012, that mailing was returned by the United States Postal Service marked “Return
to Sender, Not Deliverable as Addressed, Unable to Forward.” Plaintiff has not advised the
Court of a change of address. Therefore, 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.
Date:

July 2, 2012

cc:
Plaintiff, pro se
4412.010

2