IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI OXFORD DIVISION

SHANNON CASEY SARGENT PETITIONER

V. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:25-CV-00245-MPM-JMV

STATE OF MISSISSIPPI RESPONDENT

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE

This matter comes before the Court sua sponte for consideration of dismissal. A federal habeas corpus petition filed under

was submitted on the pro se Petitioner’s behalf by Sonja Therese Brown, whom Petitioner gave power of attorney authority, see Doc. 11, and she signed his petition in that capacity. See Doc. #s 1, 9. A party in federal court, however, must proceed either through a licensed attorney or on his or her own behalf, see

, and a non- attorney may not sign any document in this action on Petitioner’s behalf, regardless of whether she has been appointed power of attorney or that she signs with Petitioner’s knowledge and authorization. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a). Moreover, “a power of attorney does not authorize a non-attorney to file legal documents on behalf of others.” U.S. v. Musgrove,

, 766 (5th Cir. 1997) (citations omitted). Ms. Brown is not licensed to practice law and, consequently, her signature on Petitioner’s pleadings does not satisfy the requirements of Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Given these circumstances, the Court entered an Order directing Petitioner to show cause why his case should not be dismissed without prejudice for his failure to sign his pleadings as required under applicable authority. Doc. # 12. The Order warned Petitioner that his “failure to respond will result in the dismissal of this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute and obey an order of the Court under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.” Id. Petitioner responded to the motion by regurgitating the same arguments made in his previous filings and submitting another habeas petition, still unsigned by Petitioner. See Doc. #s 15, 16. The deadline for complying with the Court’s directives or otherwise submitting a signed habeas petition has passed. The instant action is, therefore, DISMISSED without prejudice for Petitioner’s failure to prosecute and obey an order of the Court. Any pending motions are hereby TERMINATED. SO ORDERED, this the 2nd day of October, 2025.

/s/Michael P. Mills UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI