Alstatt et al v. Beshear et al

Filing 16

MEMORANDUM OPINION by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell; 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 (ERH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT PADUCAH
CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:13CV-P180-R
JOHN D. ALSTATT

PLAINTIFF

v.
STEVEN L. BESHEAR et al.

DEFENDANTS
MEMORANDUM OPINION

Plaintiff John D. Alstatt initiated this civil action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Upon filing
the instant action, he 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 Clerk of Court sent a mailing to Plaintiff on November 21, 2013. That mailing was
returned by the United States Postal Service marked “Return to Sender, Not Deliverable as
Addressed, Unable to Forward.” Plaintiff has not advised the Court of a change of address.
Therefore, neither notices from this Court nor filings by Defendant 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:

February 4, 2014

cc:
Plaintiff, pro se
4413.010