Helm v. Hardin County Jail et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM OPINION by Judge David J. Hale on 6/22/2018 - 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: Pro se Plaintiff (DAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
LOUISVILLE DIVISION
HERMAN HELM, Jr.,

Plaintiff,

v.

Civil Action No. 3:18-cv-P156-DJH

HARDIN COUNTY JAIL 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 April 19, 2018. 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 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:

June 22, 2018

David J. Hale, Judge
United States District Court
cc:
Plaintiff, pro se
4415.009

2