Durdin v. Reese et al

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING CASE without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to timely and properly comply with the Court's earlier Order and certifying that an ifp appeal from this Order of Dismissal and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Judge Brian S. Miller on 6/10/09. (bkp)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION CHARLES C. DURDIN V. DR. REESE, Brassell Detention Center; and GERALD ROBINSON, Sheriff of Jefferson County 5:09CV00121 BSM/JTR PL A I N T I F F

DEFENDANTS

ORDER OF DISMISSAL Plaintiff, who is currently incarcerated at the Brassell Detention Center, has commenced this pro se § 1983 action alleging that defendants violated his constitutional rights. See docket entry #2. On May 5, 2009, the court entered an order giving plaintiff thirty days to file an Amended Complaint containing information necessary for completing the screening function mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. See docket entry #4. 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 May 5, 2009 Order,
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.)
1

and the time for doing so has expired. 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 May 5, 2009 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 June, 2009.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE