United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, 2026

Ke’Montae Jordan v. Matthew L. Moulton

Ke’Montae Jordan v. Matthew L. Moulton
United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia · Decided March 2, 2026
Ke’Montae Jordan v. Matthew L. Moulton

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA __MACON DIVISION KE’MONTAE JORDAN, : : Petitioner, : : VS. : : NO. 5:25-cv-00462-CAR-CHW MATTHEW L. MOULTON, : : Respondent. : _________________________________: ORDER OF DISMISSAL Petitioner Ke’Montae Jordan, a pretrial detainee in the Houston County Detention Center in Perry, Georgia, filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241.

ECF No. 1. He did not, however, pay the $5.00 filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis.

Petitioner was therefore ordered to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 3. Petitioner was given fourteen days to comply with this order and was cautioned that his failure to do so may result in dismissal of this action. Id. More than fourteen days passed after that order was entered, and Petitioner did not pay the filing fee, move to proceed in forma pauperis, or otherwise respond to the Court’s order. Accordingly, Petitioner was ordered to show cause to the Court why this case should not be dismissed based on his failure to comply with the order to pay the filing fee or move to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 4. Petitioner was given fourteen days to respond and was cautioned that his failure to do so would likely result in the dismissal of this case. Id. More than fourteen days have now passed since the show cause order was entered, Petitioner, has been returned to this Court as undeliverable. ECF No. 5. It is Petitioner’s responsibility to keep the Court informed as to his current address, and insofar as this Court has no information about Petitioner’s current whereabouts, this case cannot continue.

Thus, because Petitioner has failed to respond to the Court’s orders or otherwise prosecute his case, this action 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) (per curiam) (first citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); and then citing Lopez v. Aransas Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 1978)) (“The [C]ourt may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”).

SO ORDERED, this 2nd day of March, 2026.

s/ C. Ashley Royal C. ASHLEY ROYAL, SENIOR JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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