Barnett v. Potts et al
Filing
19
ORDER denying as moot 5 Partial Recommended Disposition; adopting 17 Recommended Disposition in its entirety as its findings in all respects; dismissing this case without prejudice; and certifying that an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 1/19/2023. (jbh)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
CENTRAL DIVISION
DARON RAY BARNETT
888670
v.
PLAINTIFF
Case No. 4:22-cv-00307-KGB-JJV
SUSAN POTTS, Administrator,
Drew County Detention Facility; et al.
DEFENDANTS
ORDER
The Court has reviewed the Partial Recommended Disposition and the Recommended
Disposition submitted by United States Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe (Dkt. Nos. 5, 17). Plaintiff
Daron Ray Barnett has not filed any objections to either the Partial Recommended Disposition or
the Recommended Disposition, and the time to do so has passed.
In the Recommended
Disposition, Judge Volpe recommends that Mr. Barnett’s case be dismissed without prejudice due
to lack of prosecution (Dkt. No. 14). Specifically, Judge Volpe recommends dismissal due to Mr.
Barnett’s failure to comply with a prior Order directing Mr. Barnett to provide an updated address
and to file an updated in forma pauperis application (Dkt. Nos. 14, 17).
After careful consideration, the Court adopts in its entirety as its findings in all respects the
Recommended Disposition and dismisses without prejudice this case (Dkt. No. 17). The Court
denies as moot Judge Volpe’s Partial Recommended Disposition (Dkt. No. 5). Accordingly, this
case is dismissed without prejudice. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that
an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith.
It is so ordered this 19th day of January, 2023.
________________________________
Kristine G. Baker
United States District 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?