Smith v. Williams et al

Filing 55

ORDERED that plaintiff failed to respond to the Court's Order re 32 Order. Accordingly, plaintiff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Judge B. Avant Edenfield on 2/13/2014. (loh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
STATESBORO DIVISION
ROY MANDELL SMITH,
Plaintiff,
vs.

CIVIL ACTION:

C\1 3-069

STANLEY WILLIAMS; JAMES DEAL,
etal.,
Defendants.

By Order dated July 25, 2013, this Court allowed the Plaintiff to proceed in forma

pauperis with an action fired pursuant to the provisions of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. After the
requisite frivolity review, it appeared Plaintiffs claims were unrelated. By Order dated
October 8, 2013, Plaintiff was directed to advise the Court, within thirty days, as to which
claim or related claims he desires to pursue in this case. Plaintiff was advised that his
failure to properly respond to that Order would result in the dismissal of this case. Since
the October 8, 2013 Order, Plaintiff has filed a 'Motion for Leave to File an Amended
Complaint" where he only identifies the John and Jane Does named in his original
complaint. Plaintiff has failed to properly respond to the Court's October 8, 2013, Order.
Accordingly, Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice. The Clerk of Court is
authorized and directed to enter an appropriate Judgment of Dismissal.

SO ORDERED, this -da

2014.

B. AVANTEDEtFIELD, JUOE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

AD 72A
(Rev. 8/82)