Albrecht, John v. Morgan, Deirdre et al

Filing 27

ORDER that the complaint filed by plaintiff John Morris Albrecht is DISMISSED pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4l(b) for want of prosecution. Relief from this order may be granted upon a showing of good cause. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 6/27/2014. (jef),(ps)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

JOHN MORRIS ALBRECHT,
Plaintiff,

OPINION AND ORDER

v.

ll-cv-569-wmc
DEIRDRE A. MORGAN, et al.,
Defendants.

Plaintiff John Morris Albrecht filed this lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging
that he was denied adequate medical care while incarcerated by the Wisconsin
Department of Corrections.

In particular, Albrecht alleged that his prescription for

narcotic pain medication was wrongly discontinued pursuant to a prison policy.
Defendants have filed a motion for summary judgment, a brief in support and a set of
proposed findings of fact.

Albrecht has neither filed a response nor requested an

extension of time and his deadline to do so has expired. Moreover, Albrecht has been
released from custody and has not provided a current address.
It is not the obligation of either this court or the clerk's office to search for
litigants. Rather, it is the litigant's responsibility to advise the court of any change to his
or her contact information. See Casimir v. Sunrise Fin., Inc., 299 F. App'x 591, 593, 2008
WL 4922422 (7th Cir. 2008) (affirming the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion where
movants claimed they did not receive notice of summary judgment due to a house fire,
adding that "all litigants, including pro se litigants, are responsible for maintaining
communication with the court"); see also Soliman v. Johanns, 412 F.3d 920, 922 (8th Cir.

2005) ("[A] litigant who invokes the processes of the federal courts is responsible for
maintaining communication with the court during the pendency of his lawsuit.").
Because plaintiff has failed to provide the court with a current address, it appears that he
has abandoned his complaint.
Accordingly, under the inherent power necessarily vested in a court to manage its
own docket, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 4l(b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962); Ohio
River Co. v. Carrillo, 754 F.2d 236, 238 n.5 (7th Cir. 1984).

ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the complaint filed by plaintiff John Morris Albrecht is
DISMISSED pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4l(b) for want of prosecution. Relief from this
order may be granted upon a showing of good cause.
Entered this 27th day ofJune, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

isl
WILLIAM M. CONLEY
District Judge

2