UPSHAW v. MITCHELL
UPSHAW v. MITCHELL
Trial Court Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA COLUMBUS DIVISION
UCASHA UPSHAW, : : Plaintiff, : : Case No. 4:21-cv-00126-CDL-MSH v. : : LARRY MITCHELL, et al., : : Proceedings Under
42 U.S.C. §1983Defendants. : Before the U. S. Magistrate Judge : _________________________________
DISMISSAL ORDER
Pro se Plaintiff Ucasha Upshaw, an inmate in the Muscogee County Jail in Columbus, Georgia, filed a
42 U.S.C. § 1983civil rights claim. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff did not pay the $402.00 filing fee or submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. On August 5, 2021, Plaintiff was ordered to either submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the full filing fee. ECF No. 4. Plaintiff was given fourteen (14) days to respond and was informed that failure to comply would result in dismissal of his action.
Id.Plaintiff did not respond Therefore, on August 26, 2021, Plaintiff was ordered to show cause why his action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with this Court’s order. ECF No. 6. The Court unambiguously informed Plaintiff that his action would be dismissed if he again failed to comply.
Id.Plaintiff was given fourteen (14) days to respond and he has failed to do so. Because Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s orders or otherwise prosecute his case, his complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep’t,
205 F. App’x 802, 802(11th Cir. 2006) (“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to
prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) and Lopez v. Aransas Cty. Indep. Sch. Dist.,
570 F.2d 541, 544(5th Cir. 1978)).
SO ORDERED, this 20th day of September, 2021.
S/Clay D. Land CLAY D. LAND, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Reference
- Status
- Unknown