Huffman v. Logan

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT AT ROFAINLEODKE, VA September 04, 2025 FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA LAURA A. AUSTIN, CLERK ROANOKE DIVISION BY: s/ M.Poff, Deputy Clerk

JULIAN A. HUFFMAN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No. 7:25CV00531 ) v. ) OPINION ) C/O JONATHAN LOGAN, ET AL., ) JUDGE JAMES P. JONES ) Defendants. ) )

Jullian A. Huffman, Pro Se Plaintiff. The plaintiff, Jullian A. Huffman, an unrepresented Virginia inmate, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 jointly with another inmate plaintiff. The Complaint alleges that prices charged to inmates for telephone calls and video visitation are too high. On August 11, 2025, the Court entered a Memorandum Order severing the case into two separate lawsuits. The Order warned Huffman that failure to keep the Court informed of his current mailing address would result in dismissal of the case without prejudice. The Court mailed Huffman a copy of that Order to the address he had provided on the Complaint. But on August 25, 2025, that mailing was returned to the Court marked as undeliverable, with no ability to forward the mailing. It is self-evident that the Court must have a viable address by which to communicate reliably with Huffman about this case.

Based on Huffman’s failure to provide the Court with a current and usable mailing address, I will assume that he is no longer interested in pursuing this civil action. Therefore, I will dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to

prosecute. See Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 96 (4th Cir. 1989) (stating pro se litigants are subject to time requirements and respect for court orders and dismissal is an appropriate sanction for non-compliance); Donnelly v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp., 677 F.2d 339, 340-41 (3d Cir. 1982) (recognizing a district court may sua

sponte dismiss an action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)). An appropriate Order will issue herewith. DATED: September 4, 2025

/s/ JAMES P. JONES Senior United States District Judge