Robert Travis Jenkins v. Russel Wayne Hasenbank, et al.

District of Kan 02/24/202 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Clerk, U.S. Distric FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS By:_SND Deputy ROBERT TRAVIS JENKINS, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 26-3013-JWL RUSSEL WAYNE HASENBANK, et al., Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff filed this pro se action on January 21, 2026. Plaintiff is incarcerated at the Hutchinson Correctional Facility in Hutchinson, Kansas. The Court issued a Notice of Deficiency (Doc. 2) because Plaintiffs Complaint was not on the Court-approved form and Plaintiff failed to either pay the filing fee or submit a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The Court granted Plaintiff until February 20, 2026, to cure the deficiencies. On February 4, 2026, the Court entered a Memorandum and Order (Doc. 4) (“M&O”) denying Plaintiffs motion (Doc. 3) seeking an “Order of Praecipe.” The Court found that based on Plaintiff's motion, it is unclear whether Plaintiff intended to file a civil rights complaint, a petition for writ of habeas corpus, or a K.S.A.

§ 60-1501 action. The Court granted Plaintiff until February 20, 2026, in which to either: 1) submit his § 1983 Complaint on the Court-approved form and submit the $405 filing fee or a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis; or 2) notify the Court that he intended to file a petition for habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or a state court petition under K.S.A. § 60-1501. Plaintiff has failed to comply by the Court’s deadline.

Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “authorizes a district court, upon a defendant’s motion, to order the dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or ‘a court order.’” Young v. U.S., 316 F. App’x 764, 771 (10th Cir. 2009) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)). “This rule has been interpreted as permitting district courts to dismiss actions sua sponte when one of these conditions is met.” Id. (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630–31 (1962); Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)). “In addition, it is well established in this circuit that a district court is not obligated to follow any particular procedures when dismissing an action without prejudice under Rule 41(b).” Young, 316 F. App’x at 771–72 (citations omitted).

Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s M&O by the deadline.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT this matter is dismissed without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated February 24, 2026, in Kansas City, Kansas.

S/ John W. Lungstrum JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE