Houk v. Ralcorp / Bakery Chef, No. 3:2011cv00218 - Document 7 (W.D. Ky. 2011)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION signed by Judge Charles R. Simpson, III on 5/25/2011. Mail sent to Plaintiff has been returned as undeliverable. 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. Because it appears that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecution of this case, the Court will dismiss the case by separate Order.cc: Plaintiff, pro se (RLK)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE BOYD E. HOUK v. PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:11-CV-218-S RALCORP/BAKERY CHEF DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff initiated this civil action under 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983. Upon filing the instant action, he assumed the responsibility of keeping this Court advised of his current address and to actively litigate his claims. 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. ). The Clerk of Court sent an order to Plaintiff on May 3, 2011. That order was returned by the United States Postal Service marked Return to Sender; Attempted Not Known; Unable to Forward. Plaintiff has not advised the Court of a change of address, and neither notices from this Court nor filings by Defendants in this action can be served on Plaintiff. In such situations, courts have an inherent power acting on their own initiative, to clear their calendars of cases that have remained dormant because of the inaction or dilatoriness of the parties seeking relief. Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630 (1962). Because it appears to this Court that Plaintiff has abandoned any interest in prosecution of this case, the Court will dismiss the case by separate order. Date: May 25, 2011 cc: Plaintiff, pro se 4411.009
]]>
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.
