United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, Louisville Division
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
H Lindsay, Magistrate Judge United States District Court
April 24, 2018, Donald Joe Smith, Jr. (“Smith”)
filed this lawsuit against the Commissioner. (DN 1.) Smith
represented himself throughout the course of the action. On
July 31, 2018, the Court ordered Smith to file a memorandum
of law and a fact and law summary setting forth his position.
(DN 12, at PageID # 875.) Smith has not done so. Accordingly,
for the reasons set forth herein, the Court DISMISSES THIS
ACTION WITH PREJUDICE.
initiated this lawsuit on April 24, 2018. (DN 1.) Smith
challenged the Commissioner's denial of his application
for supplemental security benefits. (DN 10-2, at PageID #
78.) On July 23, 2018, the Commissioner filed an Answer to
Smith's Complaint (DN 9) and the Administrative Record of
the case (DN 10). On July 27, 2018, Smith consented to United
States Magistrate Judge jurisdiction over his case (DN 11).
On July 31, 2018, the Court entered an order requiring Smith
to submit certain materials within sixty (60) days. (DN 12.)
The Court stated as follows:
1. Within sixty (60) days after the filing of the answer and
the administrative record LR 83.11(c)(1), the plaintiff must
set forth his/her position by an appropriate memorandum of
law specifying, inter alia, the numbered findings of the
final decision with which exception is taken and the specific
errors alleged. Any such motion/memorandum shall be
accompanied by a Fact and Law Summary on form supplied by the
Court. Failure of the plaintiff to comply with this provision
may constitute grounds for dismissing the complaint.
5. No. extension of time for complying with the terms of this
order shall be granted absent a showing of good cause.
(DN 12, at PageID # 875-76 (emphasis added).)
days after the Commissioner filed an answer and the
administrative record was September 21, 2018. Accordingly,
the deadline for Smith to file a memorandum of law and fact
and law summary was September 21, 2018. Smith did not file
anything prior to that deadline.
November 5, 2018, the Court ordered Smith to “SHOW
CAUSE as to why he did not file the required memorandum prior
to the deadline imposed by the Court no later than November
19, 2018.” (DN 13, at PageID # 879.) Smith did not file
anything prior to that deadline.
December 17, 2018, the Court issued a second show cause
order, ordering Smith to “show cause as to why he did
not file the required supporting memorandum and fact and law
summary in compliance with the Court's July 31, 2018
Order (DN 12) or respond to the Court's November 5, 2018
Order (DN 13).” (DN 14, at PageID # 881.) Additionally,
the Court advised Smith of his obligations as a pro se
Pro se plaintiffs must comply with court orders and
deadlines. Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 110 (6th Cir.
1991). A pro se plaintiff's failure to comply with court
deadlines can lead to dismissal of the complaint.
Id. Moreover, all pro se litigants must provide
written notice of a change of residential address, and if
different, mailing address, to the Clerk of Court and to the
opposing party or its counsel. LR 5.2(e). Failure to notify
the Clerk of Court of an address change may result in
dismissal of the litigant's case or other appropriate
sanctions. Id. Smith has not notified the Court of
any change in address.
(Id. at 880-81.) The Court set a deadline for
compliance of January 25, 2019. (Id.) The Court
noted in its Order that its November 5, 2018 Order had not
been returned by the Post Office. (Id. at 880.)
However, out of an abundance of caution, the Court ordered
the Commissioner to advise the Court if there was any reason
to believe the Court's information regarding Smith's
address was incorrect. (Id. at 881.) The Court
received no such notice.
the Court received no filing from Smith by the January 25,
2019 deadline, all matters to which the United States was a
party were stayed from January 4, 2019 to January 28, 2019
pursuant to General Order 2019-01, Amended General Order
2019-01, and General Order 2019-02 due to the government
shutdown. Accordingly, on February 5, 2019, the Court entered
an order extending Smith's deadline to comply with the
Court's Second Show Cause Order through February 19,
2019. (DN 15.) The Court explicitly warned Smith that failure
to comply might result in dismissal of his complaint.
(Id.) Smith did not comply.
date, Smith has not filed a memorandum of law or a fact and
law summary or any response to the ...