COX v. WARD et al

Filing 10

ORDER VACATING re 7 Order, 8 Judgment. On May 10, 2022, a day after the case was dismissed, the Court received Coxs motion for leave to proceed IFP. Doc. 9. Out of an abundance of caution, the Court VACATES its previous order of dismissal and judgment, so Coxs complaint can be screened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. Ordered by CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE MARC T TREADWELL on 5/10/2022. (ggs)

Download PDF
Case 5:22-cv-00008-MTT-MSH Document 10 Filed 05/10/22 Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION MICHAEL A. COX, Plaintiff, v. Commissioner TIMOTHY C. WARD, et al., Defendants. __________________ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:22-CV-8 (MTT) ORDER Plaintiff Michael A. Cox filed his complaint on January 5, 2022. Doc. 1. On February 25, 2022, United States Magistrate Judge Stephen Hyles ordered Cox to pay the filing fee for his complaint or submit a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). Doc. 3. On March 16, 2022, the Magistrate Judge issued an order to show cause for failure to respond to the previous order regarding the filing fee or IFP application. The Magistrate Judge issued a second order to show cause on April 14, 2022. Doc. 6. Finally, on May 9, 2022, the Court ordered the dismissal of Cox’s case for failure to comply with Court orders and prosecute his claims. Doc. 7. On May 10, 2022, a day after the case was dismissed, the Court received Cox’s motion for leave to proceed IFP. Doc. 9. Out of an abundance of caution, the Court VACATES its previous order of dismissal (Doc. 7) and judgment (Doc. 8), so Cox’s complaint can be screened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915. SO ORDERED, this 10th day of May, 2022. Case 5:22-cv-00008-MTT-MSH Document 10 Filed 05/10/22 Page 2 of 2 S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, CHIEF JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT -2-

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?