SMITH v. UNNAMED DEFENDANT(S)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiffs failure to diligently prosecute his claims and for his failure to comply with the Court's orders and instructions. Ordered by CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T TREADWELL on 9/9/2020. (kat)
Case 5:20-cv-00069-MTT-MSH Document 6 Filed 09/09/20 Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
BRANDON K. SMITH,
Presently pending before the Court is a document (ECF No. 1) that has been
construed as a complaint seeking relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 filed by pro se
Plaintiff Brandon K. Smith, a prisoner most recently incarcerated in the Macon State Prison
in Oglethorpe, Georgia. On April 29, 2020, Plaintiff was ordered to (1) either pay the
Court’s filing fee in full or file a non-prisoner motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
and (2) recast his Complaint on the Court’s standard form. Plaintiff was given twenty-one
(21) days to comply, and he was warned that the failure to fully and timely comply could
result in the dismissal of his Complaint. See generally Order, Apr. 29, 2020, ECF No. 4.
The time for compliance passed without a response from Plaintiff. As such, on July
21, 2020, Plaintiff was ordered to respond and show cause why his lawsuit should not be
dismissed for failing to comply with the Court’s orders and instructions. Plaintiff was
again given twenty-one (21) days to respond, and he was again warned that the failure to
comply would result in dismissal of his Complaint. See generally Order, July 21, 2020,
ECF No. 5.
Case 5:20-cv-00069-MTT-MSH Document 6 Filed 09/09/20 Page 2 of 2
The time for compliance has again passed without a response from Plaintiff. This
action is therefore DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to diligently
prosecute his claims and for his failure to comply with the Court’s orders and instructions.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41; see also Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep't, 205 F. App'x 802, 802
(11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (“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.1978)).
SO ORDERED, this 9th day of September, 2020.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF 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?