United States of America v. West Tennessee Construction Services, LLC et al
ORDER ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSING CASE. Signed by Chief Judge S. Thomas Anderson on 9/1/17. (Anderson, S. Thomas)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
LLC, and CURTIS BROWN,
ORDER CLOSING CASE ADMINISTRATIVELY
On October 27, 2016, Plaintiff United States of America filed an application for writ of
garnishment. The writ of garnishment was issued that same day. The garnishee filed an answer
on November 8, 2016, and an Order of Garnishment was entered on December 5, 2016. No other
action has been taken in this matter.
Administratively closing a case is a case-management tool used by district courts to obtain
an accurate count of active cases. CitiFinancial Corp. v. Harrison, 453 F.3d 245, 250 (5th Cir.
2006). That is, the court may close a case administratively for statistical purposes. Corion Corp.
v. Chen, 964 F.2d 55, 56–57 (1st Cir. 1992); see also Lehman v. Revolution Portfolio L.L.C., 166
F.3d 389 (1st Cir. 1999) (citations omitted) (“Th[is] method is used in various districts throughout
the nation in order to shelve pending, but dormant, cases.”). The court in Lehman “endorse[d] the
judicious use of administrative closings by district courts in circumstances in which a case, though
not dead, is likely to remain moribund for an appreciable period of time.” 166 F.3d at 392.
Consequently, the Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close the case for statistical purposes.
Nothing contained in this order shall be considered as a dismissal or disposition of this action.
Should further proceedings become necessary, either party may initiate that proceeding in the
same manner as if this order had not been entered.
It is so ORDERED.
s/ S. Thomas Anderson
S. THOMAS ANDERSON
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Date: September 1, 2017
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?