Kirby v. Unknown
Filing
12
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Senior Judge Glen E. Conrad on 10/26/2018. (ssm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
ROANOKE DIVISION
ANTHONY J. KIRBY,
Plaintiff,
v.
UNKNOWN,
Defendant(s).
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CLERK'S OFFICE u.s. DIST. COURT
CASE NO. 7:18CV00267
AT RO~&oKE, VA
OCT 26. 2018
MEMORANDUM OPINION
By: Hon. Glen E. Conrad
Senior United States District Judge
Plaintiff Anthony J. Kirby, proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint, pursuant to 42
U.S.C. ยง 1983, concerning events in 2017 at Green Rock Correctional Center. Kirby has not provided
the court with his current address, however. By order entered June 13, 2018, the court advised Kirby
that a failure to update his mailing address promptly would result in dismissal of this action. The court's
order entered October 2, 2018, and mailed to Kirby on that date at the address he provided with his
complaint, has been returned as undeliverable. Accordingly, the court finds that, pursuant to Rule 41(b)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Kirby has failed to prosecute this action.
See Ballard v.
Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 96 (4th Cir. 1989) (stating pro se litigants are subject to time requirements and
respect for court orders and dismissal without prejudice is an appropriate sanction for non-compliance);
Donnelly v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 677 F.2d 339, 340-41 (3d Cir. 1982) (recognizing a district
court may sua sponte dismiss an action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)). An appropriate order will
enter this day.
Kirby is advised that if he intends to proceed with this action, he must petition the court within
30 of the entry of this order for a reinstatement of this action. Any motion for reinstatement should
provide specific explanation for his failure to provide the court with an updated address.
The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this order to the plaintiff and to counsel of record for the
defendant.
ENTER:
"b
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?