James v. Osbourne et al

Filing 8

MEMORANDUM OPINION by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. Because it appears that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecution of this case, the Court will dismiss the case by separate Order. cc: Plaintiff, pro se (SG)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT OWENSBORO
JEREMY CRAIG JAMES
v.

PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:15-CV-P1-JHM

DAVID OSBOURNE 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(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.”).
The Court sent an Order to Plaintiff on March 25, 2015. That mailing was returned to the
Court by the U.S. Postal Service marked “Return to Sender; Not Deliverable as Addressed;
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:

May 26, 2015

cc:
Plaintiff, pro se
4414.009