Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:18-CV-P34-JHM
10-17-2018
ANDREW CHRISTOPHER KNIGHT PLAINTIFF v. JASON WOOSLEY et al. DEFENDANTS
cc: Plaintiff, pro se Counsel of Record
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court upon a motion by the only remaining Defendant in this action, Roy Washington, to dismiss this action, or in the alternative, to grant summary judgment in his favor, because Plaintiff Andrew Christopher Knight has failed to prosecute this action (DN 16). For the following reasons, the Court will grant Defendant Washington's motion to dismiss and deny the alternative motion for summary judgment as moot.
Plaintiff initiated this pro se prisoner civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on March 15, 2018. On July 13, 2018, the Court entered an Order granting Defendant Washington an extension of time to file an answer to the complaint (DN 13). On July 23, 2018, the copy of this Order that had been mailed to Plaintiff at his address of record was returned to the Court in an envelope marked "Return to Sender" and "Released" (DN 14). On August 1, 2018, Defendant Washington filed a notice stating that he had attempted to provide discovery materials to Plaintiff at his address of record but that these records were returned to counsel (DN 15). On September 17, 2018, Defendant Washington filed the motion that is now before the Court. In his motion, Defendant Washington also notes that Plaintiff has failed to comply with any of the deadlines set by the Court in its Scheduling Order, including the deadlines for the completion of discovery and the filing of a pretrial memorandum and dispositive motions. Plaintiff did not file a response to Defendant's motion.
In the Scheduling Order entered by the Court on March 26, 2018, the Court advised Plaintiff that "[s]hould [he] change addresses during the pendency of this matter, he must provide written notice of a change of address to the Clerk of Court and to Defendant's counsel. See LR 5.2(e)." (DN 7, Order Directing Service and Scheduling Order). This Order also warned Plaintiff that his failure to "notify the Clerk of Court of any address change" may result in dismissal of this case. In addition, this Order set the aforementioned deadlines with which Plaintiff has not complied.
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."). Although federal courts afford pro se litigants some leniency on matters that require legal sophistication, such as formal pleading rules, the same policy does not support leniency from court deadlines and other procedures readily understood by laypersons, particularly where there is a pattern of delay or failure to pursue a case. Id. at 110. Thus, because Plaintiff has failed to comply with this Court's Local Rules and its Scheduling Order by failing to provide written notice of a change of address and has failed to comply with any of the deadlines set forth in the Scheduling Order, the Court concludes that this case must be dismissed for lack of prosecution. See, e.g., White v. City of Grand Rapids, 34 F. App'x 210, 211 (6th Cir. 2002) ("[Plaintiff's] complaint was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution because he failed to keep the district court apprised of his current address."); Hananiah v. Shelby Cty. Gov't, No. 12-3074-JDT-TMP, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15392, at *2 (W.D. Tenn. Jan. 2, 2015) ("Without such basic information as a plaintiff's current address, courts have no recourse but to dismiss a complaint for failure to prosecute.").
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Washington's motion to dismiss (DN 16) is GRANTED and his alternative motion for summary judgment (DN 16) is DENIED as moot. The Court will enter a separate Order dismissing this action. Date: October 17, 2018
/s/
Joseph H. McKinley, Jr., Chief Judge
United States District Court cc: Plaintiff, pro se
Counsel of Record
4414.011