Robinson v. Montgomery et al

Filing 8

ORDER dismissing without prejudice Plaintiff's Complaint for failure to prosecute. Signed by Judge Susan Webber Wright on 9/29/2016. (mef)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION CHRISTOPHER ROBINSON, ADC #164517 v. PLAINTIFF 4:16CV00563-SWW-JTK STACEY MONTGOMERY, et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER Robinson has not responded to this Court’s August 12, 2016 Order directing him to pay the $400 filing fee for this action or file a Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis, within thirty days (Doc. No. 3). A copy of the Order was re-mailed to Robinson on August 17, 2016, after the Court received notice of a change in his address (Doc. No. 4). As of this date, however, Robinson has not responded to the Court’s Order. Therefore, the Court finds his Complaint should be dismissed without prejudice, for failure to prosecute.1 Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint is DISMISSED without Rule LR5.5(c)(2) of the Rules of the United States District Courts for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas provides as follows: 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 . . . . 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. . . . 1 prejudice for failure to prosecute. An appropriate Judgment shall accompany this Order. IT IS SO ORDERED this 29th day of September, 2016. /s/Susan Webber Wright UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?