OLIVER v. JP MORGAN CHASE BANK

Filing 6

ORDER dismissing the Complaint without prejudice for failure to comply with the Court's Order to show cause. It is further Ordered that the case be closed. Ordered by Judge W. Louis Sands on 7/22/2013. (bcl)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ALBANY DIVISION
YAMANDA OLIVER,

:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
v.
:
:
JP MORGAN CHASE,
:
:
Defendant.
:
____________________________________:

CASE NO.: 1:12-CV-34 (WLS)

ORDER
On September 5, 2012, the Court denied Plaintiff pro se’s Motion for Leave to Proceed
In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2) and required Plaintiff pro se to pay the full statutory filing fee to
proceed. (Doc. 4.) To date, Plaintiff pro se has failed to pay the filing fee. Consequently, the
Court issued a show cause order to Plaintiff pro se on April 9, 2013, ordering Plaintiff pro se to
show cause within fourteen days, in writing to the Court, as to why her case should not be
dismissed for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). (Doc. 5.) The Order also
warned Plaintiff pro se of the possibility of the dismissal of her Complaint should she fail to
respond. (Id.) Plaintiff pro se has failed to respond to the show cause order by the required
deadline and pay the required filing fee. (See generally Docket).
A “district court’s power to control its docket includes the inherent power to dismiss a
case.” Quality Foods de Centro Am., S.A. v. Latin Am. Agribusiness Dev. Corp., 711 F.2d 989,
998 (11th Cir. 1983). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) provides that involuntary dismissal
of a case is permitted “[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with [the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure] or a court order.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Eleventh Circuit precedent holds that
“[t]he legal standard to be applied under Rule 41(b) is whether there is a ‘clear record of delay or

1

willful contempt and a finding that lesser sanctions would not suffice.’” Goforth v. Owens, 766
F.2d 1533, 1535 (11th Cir. 1985). In view of Plaintiff pro se’s failure to respond to the Court’s
show cause order, the Court finds that there is a clear record of delay and that Plaintiff pro se’s
failure to prosecute is willful.
Due to the considerable passage of time without Plaintiff pro se’s compliance with either
of the Court’s Orders, it is ORDERED that Plaintiff pro se’s Complaint (Doc. 1) is
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with
the Court’s Order to show cause, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). It is further ORDERED that
the above-captioned case is CLOSED.
SO ORDERED, this

22nd day of July, 2013.

/s/ W. Louis Sands_________________________
THE HONORABLE W. LOUIS SANDS,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2