DAWKINS v. BRYSON et al
ORDER dismissing Plaintiff's complaint without predjudice re 9 Order to Show Cause. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE C ASHLEY ROYAL on 5/5/17. (lap)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
Commissioner HOMER BRYSON
Plaintiff Timothy Dawkins, a detainee in Hancock State Prison, filed a pro se civil
rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (ECF No. 1) seeking to proceed without the
prepayment of filing fees (ECF No. 2). Magistrate Judge Charles H. Weigle granted
Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis on February 6, 2017, and ordered Plaintiff to
pay an initial partial filing fee of $9.61 as well as submit an amended complaint on the
Court’s standard section 1983 form. ECF No. 8. Plaintiff was given twenty-one days in
which to comply and advised that noncompliance could result in the dismissal of his
complaint. The twenty-one days elapsed without response from Plaintiff, and on March
28, 2017, Magistrate Judge Weigle ordered Plaintiff to show cause why his complaint
should not be dismissed for failure to comply. ECF No. 9. Plaintiff was again advised
that failure to respond would result in the dismissal of his lawsuit. Id. at 2.
As of today’s date, the fourteen day deadline to show cause has passed without
response from Plaintiff, and it has been over four months since Plaintiff last contacted the
Court. For these reasons, and because Georgia’s two-year statute of limitations will not
prevent the filing of Plaintiff’s complaint in the near future, the instant action is hereby
DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Brown v.
Tallahassee Police Dep't, 205 F. App'x 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006) (“The court may dismiss
an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court
order.”) (citing Lopez v. Aransas Cnty Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir.
SO ORDERED this 5th day of May, 2017.
S/ C. Ashley Royal
C. ASHLEY ROYAL, SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
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?