Knight v. Moore

United States District Court for the Western District of Arkansas

Knight v. Moore

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS HARRISON DIVISION

BRYAN R. KNIGHT PLAINTIFF V. CASE NO. 3:19-CV-03067 □ SHERIFF MIKE MOORE, Boone County, Arkansas; JAIL ADMINISTRATOR JASON DAY; and ASSISTANT JAIL ADMINISTRATOR JASON SILVA DEFENDANTS

OPINION AND ORDER This is a civil rights action filed by the Plaintiff pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983

. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and has sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Plaintiff is incarcerated in the Boone County Detention Center. By Order (Doc. 3) entered on August 21, 2019, Plaintiff was directed to file a completed IFP application. He had failed to submit the certificate regarding his inmate account. The completed IFP application was to be filed by September 11, 2019. Plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the Order “shall” result in the dismissal of the case. . To date, Plaintiff has not filed the IFP application. Plaintiff has not sought an extension of time to comply with the Order. No mail has been returned as undeliverable. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifically contemplate dismissal of a case on the ground that the plaintiff failed to prosecute or failed to comply with an order of the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Line v. Wabash R.R. Co.,

370 U.S. 626, 630-31

(1962) (stating that the district court possesses the power to dismiss sua sponte under Rule 41(b)). Pursuant to Rule 41(b), a district court has the power to dismiss an action based

on “the plaintiff's failure to comply with any court order.” Brown v. Frey,

806 F.2d 801, 803-04

(8th Cir. 1986) (emphasis added). Additionally, Rule 5.5(c)(2) of the Local Rules for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas requires parties appearing pro se to monitor the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 41(b), this Complaint should be and hereby is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on Plaintiff's failure to prosecute this case, his failure to obey the order of the Court, and his failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). dh IT 1S SO ORDERED on day of September, 2019.

INSTHYL. BROO UNTED STATES Dis RICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown