Coleman et al v. United States Marshal Service et al

Filing 27

ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice for failure to comply with an order of this Court. Further, because the Complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, this dismissal shall count as one of Plaintiff's three allotted strikes within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 5/9/2018. (tjk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
JEFFREY COLEMAN, No. 13853-028,

Plaintiff,
vs.
U.S. MARSHAL SERVICE, and
RANDY COBB
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 17-cv-1282-JPG

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
GILBERT, District Judge:
On November 27, 2017, six inmates at White County Jail (“Jail”) filed a civil rights
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 challenging various conditions at the Jail. (Doc. 1).
Following entry of several case management orders, Jeffrey Coleman was the only remaining
Plaintiff in the action. (Docs. 5, 16, and 24). In addition, the Complaint did not survive
preliminary review, and Coleman was directed to file an amended complaint on or before April
23, 2018. (Doc. 24). Coleman was warned that failure to file an amended complaint would
result in dismissal of this action. Id. That deadline has now passed. Coleman has not filed an
amended complaint. He also has failed to request an extension of the deadline for doing so.
As a result, this case is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to comply with an order
of this Court. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); see generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir.
1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994). Further, because the Complaint
failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, this dismissal shall count as one of
Plaintiff’s three allotted “strikes” within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).

1

Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was incurred at the time the
action was filed, thus the filing fee of $350.00 remains due and payable. See 28 U.S.C. §
1915(b)(1); Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998).
If Plaintiff wishes to appeal this Order, he may file a notice of appeal with this Court
within thirty days of the entry of judgment. FED. R. APP. 4(A)(4). A motion for leave to appeal
in forma pauperis MUST set forth the issues the Plaintiff plans to present on appeal. See FED. R.
APP. P. 24(a)(1)(C). If Plaintiff does choose to appeal, he will be liable for the $505.00 appellate
filing fee irrespective of the outcome of the appeal. See FED. R. APP. 3(e); 28 U.S.C. §
1915(e)(2); Ammons v. Gerlinger, 547 F.3d 724, 725-26 (7th Cir. 2008); Sloan v. Lesza, 181
F.3d 857, 858-59 (7th Cir. 1999); Lucien v. Jockish, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998).
Moreover, if the appeal is found to be nonmeritorious, Plaintiff may incur an additional “strike.”
A proper and timely motion filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) may toll the
30-day appeal deadline. FED. R. APP. 4(a)(4). A Rule 59(e) motion must be filed no more than
twenty-eight (28) days after the entry of the judgment, and this 28-day deadline cannot be
extended.
The Clerk’s Office is DIRECTED to close this case and enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: 5/9/2018

s/J. Phil Gilbert
United States District Court

2