Buckley v. Richards

Filing 8

ORDER OF DISMISSAL, pltf's complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to timely and properly comply with the Court's October 6, 2011 Order 3 ; judgment will be entered accordingly. Signed by Chief Judge J. Leon Holmes on 11/10/11. (vjt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
EARNEST BUCKLEY,
ADC #130278
v.

PLAINTIFF

No. 4:11CV00722 JLH/JTR

RICHARDS, Sergeant,
Saline County Detention Center

DEFENDANT
ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, Earnest Buckley, is a prisoner in the Cummins Unit of the Arkansas Department
of Correction. In this pro se § 1983 action, he alleges that Defendant Sergeant Richards violated
his constitutional rights. See docket entry #2.
On October 6, 2011, the Court entered an Order giving Plaintiff thirty days to file an
Amended Complaint containing information necessary to complete the screening function mandated
by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. See docket entry #3. Importantly, the Court advised Plaintiff that the failure
to timely and properly do so would result in the dismissal of his case, without prejudice, pursuant
to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).1 Id.
As of the date of this Order of Dismissal, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s
October 6, 2011 Order, and the time for doing so has expired.

1

Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) provides that: “It is the duty of any party not represented by counsel
to promptly notify the Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of any change in his or her
address, to monitor the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently. A party
appearing for himself/herself shall sign his/her pleadings and state his/her address, zip code, and
telephone number. If any communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is not responded to
within thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed without prejudice. Any party proceeding pro se
shall be expected to be familiar with and follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.” (Emphasis
added.)

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1.

Pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), this case is DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE,

due to Plaintiff’s failure to timely and properly comply with the Court’s October 6, 2011 Order.
2.

The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis

appeal from this Order of Dismissal and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good
faith.
DATED this 10th day of November, 2011.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE