Adams v. Coke et al

Filing 18

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. on 1/10/2017: The Court will dismiss this action by separate order. cc: Plaintiff (pro se) (JBM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
LOUISVILLE DIVISION
TYRICE CHANTEZ ADAMS

PLAINTIFF

v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:16-CV-P192-JHM

CHARLES L. COKE, Jr., et al.

DEFENDANTS

MEMORANDUM OPINION
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 an Order to Plaintiff on September 19, 2016. That mailing was returned
to the Court by the U.S. Postal Service marked “Return to Sender; Attempted Not Known;
Unable to Forward.” Plaintiff has not advised the Court of his new address, and notices from
this Court 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.
Date:

January 10, 2017

cc:
Plaintiff, pro se
4414.009