Johnson v. Manuel et al, No. 5:2016cv00039 - Document 5 (W.D. Ky. 2016)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell concluding that because Plaintiff has failed to file a notice of change of address, he has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case. The Court will dismiss the action by separate Order pursuant to Rule 41(b). cc: Plaintiff, pro se (RR)

Download PDF
Johnson v. Manuel et al Doc. 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT PADUCAH CHRISTOPHER MARK JOHNSON v. PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:16-CV-P39-TBR ALAN MANUEL et. al. DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OPINION On March 21, 2016, Plaintiff Christopher Mark Johnson, who is proceeding pro se, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action against Defendants. Upon filing the instant action, Plaintiff assumed the responsibility to keep this Court advised of his current address and to actively litigate his claims. See Local Rule 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.”) On July 26, 2016, the Clerk of Court issued a notice of deficiency in which it noted that Plaintiff had failed to either pay the $400.00 filing fee or file a prisoner application to proceed without prepayment of fees (DN 3). The notice further stated that Plaintiff had 30 days to cure this deficiency. On September 1, 2016, the notice was returned to the Court in an envelope marked “RETURN TO SENDER NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD” (DN 4). Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes the involuntary dismissal of an action if a plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with an order of the court. See Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 109 (6th Cir. 1991) (“Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) recognizes the power of the district court to enter a sua sponte order of dismissal.”) “Further, the United States Supreme Dockets.Justia.com Court has recognized that courts have an inherent power to manage their own affairs and may dismiss a case sua sponte for lack of prosecution.” Lyons-Bey v. Pennell, 93 F. App’x 732, 733 (6th Cir. 2004) (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962)). Because Plaintiff has failed to file a notice of change of address, the Court concludes that he has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case, and the Court will dismiss the action by separate Order. Date: September 14, 2016 cc: Plaintiff, pro se 4414.011 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.