Hicks v. Cobbs et al

Filing 19

ORDER dismissing pltf's complaint without prejudice; Motions to Dismiss 9 18 are denied as moot. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 9/1/11. (vjt)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION ROLAND KENNEDY HICKS v. PLAINTIFF Case No. 4:11-cv-433-DPM SHANA COBBS, Officer, Badge # 8635, North Little Rock Police Department; GREG BLANKENSHIP, Officer, Badge #4530, North Little Rock Police Department; and AMANDA KISSINGER, Officer, Badge #1577, North Little Rock Police Department DEFENDANTS ORDER Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) allows for dismissal without prejudice of a pro se plaintiff's complaint "if any communication from the Court to [the] plaintiff is not responded to within thirty (30) days[.]" It also states that a pro se plaintiff such as Hicks has a duty "to monitor the progress of [his] case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently." Ibid. On 12July 2011, the Court granted Hicks until 5 August 2011 to respond to the pending motion to dismiss. The new deadline has come and gone, but Hicks has neither responded to the motion nor made any further contact with the Court. His complaint is therefore dismissed without prejudice. Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). The pending motions to dismiss, Document Nos. 9 & 18, are denied as moot. So Ordered. D.P. Marshall Jr. Z/ United States District Judge / 'tf 2 ;;'0"

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?