JACKSON v. WALTON COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY

Filing 6

ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE re 1 Complaint. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE TILMAN E SELF, III on 3/6/2025. (vs)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATHENS DIVISION
DONALD JEROME JACKSON,

:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
V.
:
:
WALTON COUNTY
:
DETENTION FACILITY
:
MEDICAL STAFF,
:
:
Defendant.
:
:
_________________________________:

NO. 3:24-cv-00115-TES-CHW

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Plaintiff Donald Jerome Jackson, a detainee in the Walton County Jail in Monroe,
Georgia, filed a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff also
filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 2. Thereafter, the United
States Magistrate Judge ordered Plaintiff to file a certified account statement and a recast
complaint if he wanted to proceed with this action. ECF No. 4. The Magistrate Judge
gave Plaintiff fourteen days to take these actions and cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to
do so could result in the Court dismissing this case. Id.
More than fourteen days passed after the Magistrate Judge entered that order. In
that time, Plaintiff did not submit an account statement, file a recast complaint, or otherwise
respond to the order for him to do so. Thus, the Magistrate Judge ordered Plaintiff to show
cause to the Court why this case should not be dismissed based on Plaintiff’s failure to file
an account statement or a recast complaint. The Magistrate Judge gave Plaintiff fourteen
days to respond and cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to respond would likely result in the

Court dismissing this case.
More than fourteen days have now passed since the Magistrate Judge entered the
show cause order. Plaintiff has not responded to that order. Thus, because Plaintiff has
failed to comply with the Court’s orders or to otherwise prosecute his case, the Court now
DISMISSES the complaint WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Brown
v. Tallahassee Police Dep’t, 205 F. App’x 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (first
citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); and then citing Lopez v. Aransas Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570
F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 1978)) (“The [C]ourt may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule
41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”).
SO ORDERED, this 6th day of March, 2025.
S/ Tilman E. Self, III
TILMAN E. SELF, III, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2