Barassi v. Lewis

Filing 9

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Chief Judge Joseph H. McKinley, Jr. on 8/14/2017: 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) (JBM)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
OWENSBORO DIVISION
NORMAN MARTIN BARASSI
v.

PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:17-CV-P40-JHM

CAPTAIN MIKE LEWIS

DEFENDANT
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 a Memorandum Opinion and Order to Plaintiff on June 13, 2017. 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 Defendant 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:

August 14, 2017

cc:
Plaintiff, pro se
4414.009