Cannon v. Osceola Police Department et al

Filing 20

ORDER granting 18 Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff has failed to comply with 15 Order, and has failed to monitor the progress of his case. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 4/2/2012. (jct)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
CHARLES PALMER CANNON, JR.
v.

PLAINTIFF

CASE NO. 3:10CV00270 BSM

OSCEOLA POLICE DEPARTMENT, et al.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Defendants’ motion to dismiss [Doc. No. 18] is granted. Plaintiff Charles Palmer
Cannon, Jr. was ordered on September 13, 2011, to fully respond to defendants’ discovery
[Doc. No. 15] and was warned that failure to respond within ten days may result in his case
being dismissed. Defendants now move to dismiss [Doc. No. 18] as Cannon has failed to
comply. Cannon has not responded to the motion to dismiss.
A party that fails to obey an order to provide discovery may have his action dismissed.
FED. R. CIV. P. 37(b)(2). Furthermore, Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) dictates that it is the duty of any
party proceeding pro se to “monitor the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the
action diligently.”
IT IS SO ORDERED this 2nd day of April 2012.

________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE