District Court, E.D. Washington, 2026

Emmanuel Franklin Phillips v. Airway Heights Correctional Center Medical Staff

Emmanuel Franklin Phillips v. Airway Heights Correctional Center Medical Staff
District Court, E.D. Washington · Decided January 22, 2026
Emmanuel Franklin Phillips v. Airway Heights Correctional Center Medical Staff

Trial Court Opinion

1 EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Jan 22, 2026 SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON EMMANUEL FRANKLIN PHILLIPS, NO: 2:25-CV-00269-RLP Plaintiff, ORDER OF DISMISSAL PURSUANT 10 TO LCivR 41(b)(2) v. AIRWAY HEIGHTS CORRECTIONAL CENTER MEDICAL STAFF, Defendant.

15 Plaintiff initiated this action while incarcerated at the Airway Heights Corrections Center. ECF No. 1. After the Court granted him leave to proceed in forma pauperis under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b), ECF No. 6, Plaintiff notified the Court of his release from incarceration and provided a residential address in Spokane, Washington. ECF No. 9. Mail sent to Plaintiff at that address was returned as undeliverable on November 18, 2025. ECF No. 11.

1 Local Civil Rule 41(b)(2) requires a pro se litigant to keep the Court and opposing parties advised as to his current mailing address. If mail directed to a pro se plaintiff is returned by the Postal Service, he has sixty (60) days to notify the Court and opposing parties of his current address or the Court may dismiss the action. LCivR 41(b)(2).

6 The Court has an interest in managing its docket and in the prompt resolution of civil matters. See Destfino v. Reiswig, 630 F.3d 952, 959 (9th Cir. 2011) (affirming district court’s inherent power to control its docket); see also Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642–44 (9th Cir. 2002) (discussing factors to consider in dismissing a claim for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with court order, including the public’s interest in expeditious resolution, the court’s need to manage docket, and the risk of prejudice to defendants). Plaintiff’s mail has been returned and the Court has not been apprised of a current address.

14 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 15 1. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to LCivR 41(b)(2).

17 2. The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal of this Order could not be taken in good faith and would lack any arguable basis in law or fact.

1 IT ISSO ORDERED. The Clerk’s Office is directed to enter this Order, 2|| enter judgment, provide copies to Plaintiff at his last known address and CLOSE 3|| the file.

4 DATED January 22, 2026.

LLC _ ss REBECCA L. PENNELL 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.