PETERSON v. FORD et al
ORDER DISMISSING case for want of prosecution. Ordered by US DISTRICT JUDGE TILMAN E SELF, III on 1/8/2021. (TES)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
CIVIL ACTION NO.
Warden FORD, et al.,
Plaintiff Adam Peterson, a prisoner in Washington State Prison in Davisboro,
Georgia, has filed a pro se civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. [Doc. 1]. Plaintiff
also sought leave to proceed in this action in forma pauperis (without prepayment of the
filing fee). [Doc. 2]. Upon review, the Court granted Plaintiff such leave, but also
ordered him to pay an initial partial filing fee in the amount of $71.30. [Doc. 4]. Plaintiff
was given 21 days to pay the amount due to the Clerk of Court. [Id.]. Furthermore, the
Court cautioned Plaintiff that failure to comply with its Order may result in dismissal of
this action. [Id.]. The time for compliance passed, and Plaintiff failed to pay the initial
partial filing fee.
As a result, on December 10, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why
this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the Court’s Order. [Doc.
5]. The Court specifically informed Plaintiff that his action would be dismissed if he
failed to respond. [Id.]. Plaintiff was given 14 days to respond, and he failed to do so.
Because Plaintiff has failed to respond to the Court’s Orders or otherwise prosecute his
case, the Court DISMISSES his Complaint [Doc. 1] 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 court may dismiss an action sua sponte
under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”).
SO ORDERED, this 7th day of January, 2021.
S/ Tilman E. Self, III
TILMAN E. SELF, III, 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?