Odom v. Dietz et al, No. 3:2007cv00427 - Document 16 (W.D. Ky. 2009)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION by Judge John G. Heyburn, II on 4/13/09; for the reasons set forth, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case. The Court will therefore, dismiss the action by separate Order.cc: Plaintiff, pro se (SC)

Download PDF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:07CV-P427-H GLENN D. ODOM PLAINTIFF v. ROBERT DIETZ et al. DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OPINION Upon filing the instant action, Plaintiff Glenn D. Odom assumed the responsibility to keep this Court advised of his current address and to litigate his claims actively. See LR 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 December 12, 2008, the copy of the Court s December 2, 2008, Memorandum and Order denying appointment of counsel sent to Plaintiff was returned to the Court by the United States Postal Service marked Return to Sender-Not Deliverable As Addressed-Unable to Forward (DN 15). Apparently, Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated at the Kentucky State Reformatory (his address of record), and he has not advised the Court of any change in his address. Because neither notices from this Court nor filings by Defendant can be served on Plaintiff, the Court concludes that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecuting this case. The Court will, therefore, dismiss the action by separate Order. Date: April 13, 2009 cc: Plaintiff, pro se 4412.005

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.