Gardner v. Budnik et al

Filing 46

ORDER that Plaintiff's amended complaint is dismissed without prejudice 9 . All pending motions are denied as moot 34 . The Clerk shall close this case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joe J. Volpe on 4/27/2016. (lej)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS PINE BLUFF DIVISION WALLACE A. GARDNER, ADC # 110784 v. PLAINTIFF 5:16CV00024-JJV CHRISTOPHER BUDNIK, Deputy Warden, Varner Unit; et al. DEFENDANTS ORDER Wallace A. Gardner (“Plaintiff”) is a “three-striker” within the meaning of the Prison Litigation Reform Act.1 I initially allowed him to proceed in forma pauperis after finding that his allegations, taken as true, indicated he was in danger of imminent physical injury. (Doc. No. 10.) Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis status was revoked on March 4, 2016, however, after I determined that, based on Defendants’ evidence, he was not in physical danger. (Doc. No. 30.) At that time, I directed Plaintiff to pay the full filing fee within fourteen days. (Id.) On March 22, 2016, Plaintiff requested a sixty-day extension to tender the filing fee. (Doc. No. 39.) Later that day, I extended the deadline by thirty days and cautioned Plaintiff that this would be the only extension he would receive on this issue. (Doc. No. 40.) The deadline has now passed and Plaintiff has not submitted the fee. He was warned that failure to pay the fee would result in this action being dismissed without prejudice. (Doc. No. 30 at 2.) IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that: 1. Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 9) is DISMISSED without prejudice. 2. All pending motions are DENIED as moot. 3. The Clerk of Court shall close this case. 1 See Gardner v. Kelley, et al., 5:15CV00223-SWW; Gardner v. Hutchison et al., 4:15CV00650-JLH; and Gardner v. Fox et al., 4:14CV00197-JM. 1 DATED this 27th day of April, 2016. ____________________________________ JOE J. VOLPE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 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?