Coleman v. Commonwealth of Ky
Filing
5
MEMORANDUM OPINION by Senior Judge Charles R. Simpson, III; The Court will dismiss the case by separate order.cc:Petitioner(pro se) (ERH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13CV-P479-S
WARDELL COLEMAN
PETITIONER
v.
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
RESPONDENT
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Petitioner Wardell Coleman initiated this action by filing a petition for writ of habeas
corpus on his own paper. On May 13, 2013, the Clerk of Court sent a notice of deficiency to
Petitioner. On June 5, 2013, that mailing was returned by the United States Postal Service
marked “Return to Sender, Attempted – Not Known, Unable to Forward” (DN 4).
Upon filing the instant action, Petitioner assumed the responsibility to keep this Court
advised of his current address and to litigate his claims actively. Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 41(b) authorizes dismissal of an action “[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to
comply with these rules or a court order.” Further, 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).
Apparently, Petitioner is no longer incarcerated at the institution of his address of
record, and he has not advised the Court of any change in his address. Because neither notices
from this Court nor filings by Respondent can be served on Petitioner, the Court concludes that
Petitioner has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case.
The Court will, therefore, dismiss the action by separate Order.
Date:
August 2, 2013
C al R Smpo I , ei J d e
h r s . i sn I Sno u g
e
I
r
U i dSae Ds i C ut
nt tt ir t o r
e
s tc
cc:
Petitioner, pro se
4411.010
2
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?