Kumar v. Noem

AMIT KUMAR,
Petitioner,
vs.
KRISTI NOEM,
Respondent.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
§
§
§
§
§ 	CIVIL ACTION NO . 4:26-CV-01058
§
§
§
§
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
At the time Amit Kumar filed this habeas petition to challenge his immigration
detention, he was confined at the Webb County Detention Center. Doc. No. 1. All of the
Court's notices have been returned to sender, with a notation that he is "No Longer Here."
See Doc. Nos. 5, 6, 7.
To date, Petitioner has not updated his address to provide the Court with a current,
valid address as required by Rule 83 .4 of the Local Rules for the Southern District of Texas,
Houston Division. 	Under that rule, a pro se litigant is responsible for keeping the Clerk
advised in writing of his current address. 	The Court will only send notices to the address
on file. Petitioner has clearly failed to provide the Court with an accurate, current address.
Petitioner 's failure to pursue this action leads the Court to conclude that he lacks
due diligence. 	Therefore, under the inherent powers necessarily vested in a district court
to manage its own affairs, this Court determines that dismissal for want of prosecution is
appropriate. 	See FED. R. CIV. P. 4l(b); Sla ck v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 , 489 (2000)
1/2
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
June 26, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:26-cv-01058 Document 8 Filed 06/26/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

(stating that "[t]he failure to comply with an order of the court is grounds for dismissal
with prejudice"); Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030 (5th Cir. 1998) (noting that a district court
may sua sponte dismiss an action for failure to prosecute or to comply with any court
order).
Petitioner is advised, however, that relief from this Order may be granted upon a
proper showing by filing a motion under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
within 30 days of this Order. At a minimum, a proper showing under Rule 60(b) includes
full compliance with the Court's previous notices or orders, including providing a current,
valid address pursuant to the Local Rules.
2 / 2
Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows:
1. 	This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for want of prosecution.
2. 	All pending motions are DENIED as MOOT.
SIGNED on this 	~~---\'--- day of June 2026.
ANDREW S. HANEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 4:26-cv-01058 Document 8 Filed 06/26/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2