Chawich v. Cook et al
Filing
61
ORDER granting 59 Motion to Voluntarily Dismiss. Chawich's complaint is dismissed without prejudice. All other pending motions are denied as moot. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal taken from the order and judgment dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith. Signed by Magistrate Judge Patricia S. Harris on 4/25/2016. (jak)(Docket text modified on 4/25/2016 to correct a typographical error).(jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
JONESBORO DIVISION
KHALDOUN CHAWICH
V.
PLAINTIFF
NO: 3:14CV00145 PSH
DALE COOK et al
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
On April 19, 2016, defendants Melvin and Petty filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff Khaldoun
Chawich’s complaint with prejudice pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 41(b), asserting that Chawich has
failed to respond to their discovery requests, despite being ordered to do so (Doc. No. 57). In
response, counsel for Chawich has filed a motion seeking to voluntarily dismiss the complaint
without prejudice pursuant to FED.R.CIV.P. 41(a)(2), or in the alternative to grant plaintiff additional
time to comply with the discovery requests.
Chawich’s counsel indicates in her motion that she has been unable to communicate with
Chawich, and it is not clear that granting Chawich additional time to respond to discovery requests
would be fruitful. However, under the circumstances, the dismissal should be without prejudice.
Accordingly, Chawich’s motion to voluntarily dismiss his complaint (Doc. No. 59) is GRANTED,
and Chawich’s complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. All other pending motions are
DENIED AS MOOT. The Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal taken from the order and
judgment dismissing this action is considered frivolous and not in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 25th day of April, 2016.
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?