From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Weiter

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Mar 31, 2021
CASE NO. 21-3077-SAC (D. Kan. Mar. 31, 2021)

Opinion

CASE NO. 21-3077-SAC

03-31-2021

CASEY LAMONT WILLIAMS, JR., Plaintiff, v. DANIELLA WEITER, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff filed this pro se civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 2.) On March 15, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and assessed an initial partial filing fee in the amount of $18.50, calculated under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). The order provides that the failure to pay the initial partial filing fee or file an objection by March 29, 2021, "may result in the dismissal of this matter without further notice." The Court's order was mailed to Plaintiff at his current address of record and was returned as undeliverable. (Doc. 4.)

The Court's Local Rules provide that "[e]ach attorney or pro se party must notify the clerk in writing of any change of address or telephone number. Any notice mailed to the last address of record of an attorney or pro se party is sufficient notice." D. Kan. Rule 5.1(c)(3). Plaintiff has failed to provide the Court with a Notice of Change of Address.

Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure "authorizes a district court, upon a defendant's motion, to order the dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or 'a court order.'" Young v. U.S., 316 F. App'x 764, 771 (10th Cir. 2009) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)). "This rule has been interpreted as permitting district courts to dismiss actions sua sponte when one of these conditions is met." Id. (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962); Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)). "In addition, it is well established in this circuit that a district court is not obligated to follow any particular procedures when dismissing an action without prejudice under Rule 41(b)." Young, 316 F. App'x at 771-72 (citations omitted).

Plaintiff has failed to provide the Court with a Notice of Change of Address and failed to submit the initial partial filing fee by the Court's deadline.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT this matter is dismissed without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated March 31, 2021, in Topeka, Kansas.

s/ Sam A. Crow

SAM A. CROW

U. S. Senior District Judge


Summaries of

Williams v. Weiter

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Mar 31, 2021
CASE NO. 21-3077-SAC (D. Kan. Mar. 31, 2021)
Case details for

Williams v. Weiter

Case Details

Full title:CASEY LAMONT WILLIAMS, JR., Plaintiff, v. DANIELLA WEITER, et al.…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

Date published: Mar 31, 2021

Citations

CASE NO. 21-3077-SAC (D. Kan. Mar. 31, 2021)