SPARROW v. SHIVER

United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia

SPARROW v. SHIVER

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION NICHOLAS LEE SPARROW, : Plaintiff, : NO, 7:21-CV-00141-WLS-TQL VS. : DET. GRADY SHIVER, INV. FRANK ROLLINS, : Defendants.

ORDER Pro se Plaintiff Nicholas Lee Sparrow, a pre-trial detainee at the Thomas County Jail in Thomasville, Georgia, filed a civil rights complaint under

42 U.S.C. § 1983

. ECF Nos. | and 6. Plaintiff also filed motions to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF Nos. 2 and 7. On December 15, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff's motions to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered him to pay an initial partial filing fee of $6.52. ECF No.8. Plaintiff was given fourteen days to pay. /d, He was informed that failure to comply may result in dismissal. Jd. Plaintiff failed to pay the initial partial filing fee. Therefore, on January 4, 2022, the Court notified Plaintiff that it had not received a response and ordered him to show cause why his action should not be dismissed for failure to comply and diligently pursue his claims. ECF No. 9. Plaintiff was again given fourteen days to comply. /d. Furthermore, the Court specifically informed Plaintiff that his action would be dismissed if he failed to respond. /d. Plaintiff has once again failed to respond.

Because Plaintiff has failed to respond to the Court’s orders or otherwise prosecute his case, his complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Brown vy. 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

(Sth Cir. 1978)).

SO ORDERED, this 44#4day of January, 2022.

Mi, Lo Stee fo W. LOUIS SANDS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Reference

Status
Unknown