Snead v. Covington VA

Opinion

ATROANOKE, VA FILED October 01, 2024 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT _LAURAA. AUSTIN, CLERK FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ®ojyr. Taylor ROANOKE DIVISION DEPUTY CLERK

KING CEDRIC OMAR SNEAD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) Case No. 7:24CV00252 ) V. ) OPINION ) COVINGTON VA, ET AL. ) JUDGE JAMES P. JONES ) Defendants. ) ) King Cedric Omar Snead, Pro Se Plaintiff. The plaintiff, King Cedric Omar Snead, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging that public entities violated his constitutional rights. Although Snead’s Complaint provided a mailing address where the court could send orders, the court’s initial order in the case, ECF No. 7, was returned as undeliverable at the stated address. It is axiomatic that the court must have an address by which to communicate reliably with the parties. As some time has passed with no further communication from the plaintiff in this case, I conclude 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: October 1, 2024

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