Cutting v. Mathis et al
MEMORANDUM OPINION: Accordingly, this action will be DISMISSED sua sponte for want of prosecution. See Order for details. (c/m pro se plaintiff) Signed by District Judge J Ronnie Greer on 03/20/2017. (CAT)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
OSCAR RAY CUTTING,
SHERIFF CHRIS MATHIS, CAPTAIN
TOM SMITH, CHIEF RON STREET, DR.
KENNETH MATHEWS, NURSE
PRACTIONER FRANCESCA SHOUHN,
VISE PRESIDENT DR. KRISTAL
SHOUNDERS, and NURSE AMBER
This pro se prisoner’s civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 is before the Court on
the postal return of court correspondence mailed to Plaintiff at the last address he provided to the
Court [Doc. 6]. The correspondence was returned to the Court by the postal authorities more
than fourteen days ago, with the face of the envelope marked, “Return to Sender and Paroled”
It appears that Plaintiff has failed to apprise the Court of his current address and, without
his correct and current address, neither the Court nor Defendants can communicate with him
regarding his case. In fact, Local Rule 83.13 not only requires pro se litigants, such as Plaintiff,
to file a written notice with the Clerk, but also requires written notice to be given to all parties,
within fourteen days of any change of address. See E.D. Tenn. L.R. 83.13.
Accordingly, this action will be DISMISSED sua sponte for want of prosecution. See
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (recognizing
court’s authority to dismiss a case sua sponte for lack of prosecution); White v. City of Grand
Rapids, 34 F.App’x 210, 211(6th Cir. 2002) (finding that a pro se prisoner’s complaint “was
subject to dismissal for want of prosecution because he failed to keep the district court apprised
of his current address”); Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108 (6th Cir. 1991).
AN APPROPRIATE ORDER WILL ENTER.
s/J. RONNIE GREER
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?