Thomas v. Volkman et al

Filing 22

ORDER dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint without prejudice for failure to prosecute; denying 13 Motion to Dismiss as moot; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal is considered frivolous and not in good faith. Signed by Judge Billy Roy Wilson on 11/21/2022. (jbh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CENTRAL DIVISION
DAVID THOMAS,
#297527
VS.

PLAINTIFF
4:22-CV-00151-BRW-JTK

DOUGLAS VOLKMAN, et al.

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

David Thomas (“Plaintiff”) has not responded to the Court’s October 11, 2022 Order
directing him to update his address within 30 days. (Doc. No. 16). The Court warned Plaintiff
in the Order that his failure to comply would result in the dismissal of his Complaint without
prejudice.
Rule Local Rule 5.5(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. . . .
Because Plaintiff failed to respond, his Complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for
failure to prosecute. Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 13) is DENIED as moot. The
Court certifies that an in forma pauperis appeal is considered frivolous and not in good faith.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 21st day of November, 2022.

Billy Roy Wilson
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE