GREENE v. GARDNER

United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia

GREENE v. GARDNER

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

RUSSELL BERNARD GREENE, : : Plaintiff, : VS. : NO. 5:19-CV-00418-MTT-CHW : LT. RODNEY GARDNER, et al., : : Defendants. : ________________________________ :

ORDER

Presently pending before the Court is a pleading filed by pro se Plaintiff Russell Bernard Greene, a prisoner most recently incarcerated in the Baldwin State Prison, that has been construed as a Complaint seeking relief pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983

(ECF No. 1). On December 27, 2019, Plaintiff was ordered to (1) pay the $400.00 filing fee or submit a proper and complete motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and (2) recast his Complaint on the Court’s standard form. Plaintiff was given twenty-one (21) days to comply, and he was warned that failure to fully and timely comply would result in the dismissal of his case. See generally Order, Dec. 27, 2019, ECF No. 5. The time for compliance passed without a response from Plaintiff. As such, on February 11, 2020, Plaintiff was ordered to respond and show cause why his lawsuit should not be dismissed for failing to diligently pursue his claims and to comply with the Court’s orders and instructions. Plaintiff was given twenty-one (21) days to comply, and he was again warned that failure to fully and timely comply could result in dismissal of his Complaint. See generally Order, Feb. 11, 2020, ECF No. 6. The time for compliance has again passed without a response from Plaintiff. This action is therefore DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to diligently

prosecute his claims and for his failure to comply with the Court’s orders and instructions. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41; see also Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep't,

205 F. App'x 802, 802

(11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citing Lopez v. Aransas Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist.,

570 F.2d 541, 544

(5th Cir. 1978)). Plaintiff’s pending motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) is DENIED as moot.

SO ORDERED, this 17th day of April, 2020. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Reference

Status
Unknown