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)

Download PDF
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?