From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

White v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION
Aug 4, 2015
Case No. CV415-181 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 4, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. CV415-181 Case No. CR414-332

08-04-2015

EMORY WHITE, Movant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Court granted the government an extension of time to respond to Emory White's 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. CR414-332, doc. 26. That Order was served upon movant but has come back as undeliverable, with no forwarding address. Doc. 27. Per Local Rule 11.1, it was White's continuing duty to keep the Court apprised of his current address. Without it, the Court cannot move this case forward or even communicate with him. And the Court will not waste the government's resources by requiring it to respond to a possibly abandoned § 2255 motion.

A court has the power to prune from its docket those cases that amount to no more than mere deadwood. Accordingly, Emory White's 2255 motion should be DISMISSED without prejudice for his failure to prosecute this action. L.R. 41(b); see Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (courts have the inherent authority to dismiss claims for lack of prosecution); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989).

SO REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED, this 4th day of August, 2015.

/s/ _________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA


Summaries of

White v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION
Aug 4, 2015
Case No. CV415-181 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 4, 2015)
Case details for

White v. United States

Case Details

Full title:EMORY WHITE, Movant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION

Date published: Aug 4, 2015

Citations

Case No. CV415-181 (S.D. Ga. Aug. 4, 2015)