Moore, Jr. v. Securus Technologies, Inc. et al

Filing 15

ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice, based on Plaintiff's failure to comply with this Court's Order to file a First Amended Complaint on or before October 24, 2018 (Doc. 13) and to update his address (Doc. 9, pp. 7-8). The dismissal counts as one of his three allotted strikes within the meaning of § 1915(g). Signed by Judge J. Phil Gilbert on 10/31/2018. (tjk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
ANTHONY T. MOORE, Jr., #446508,
and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
vs.
SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
ST. CLAIR COUNTY, ILLINOIS,
RICHARD WATSON, and
AUSTIN EVERETT,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 17-cv-01285-JPG

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
GILBERT, District Judge:
This case was reopened on September 26, 2018, after the Court granted a Motion for
Reconsideration (Doc. 12) filed by Plaintiff Anthony Moore, Jr. (See Doc. 13). The underlying
case was dismissed because Plaintiff failed to timely file a First Amended Complaint or request an
extension of the deadline for doing so. (Docs. 10-11). Plaintiff explained that he did not receive
the Order Dismissing Complaint (Doc. 9), which set the deadline to amend. The Court vacated
the Order Dismissing Case (Doc. 10) and Judgment (Doc. 11) and granted Plaintiff an additional
28 days to file the First Amended Complaint. (Doc. 13). Accordingly, it was due on or before
October 24, 2018. Id.
The deadline has, once again, expired. Plaintiff did not file a First Amended Complaint
prior to the deadline, or after. He did not request an extension. In fact, the Order Reopening Case
was returned to the Court undelivered, despite the Court’s clear warning that Plaintiff is “under a
continuing obligation to keep the Clerk of Court and each opposing party informed of any change

1

in his address” and reminder that “the Court will not independently investigate his whereabouts.”
(Doc. 9, pp. 8-9; Doc. 14).
The Court will not allow this matter to linger indefinitely. This action shall be dismissed
with prejudice based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with two Orders of this Court (Doc. 9, pp. 78; Doc. 13) and failure to prosecute his claims. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). The dismissal will count
as one of Plaintiff’s three allotted “strikes” within the meaning of § 1915(g).
Disposition
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice, based on
Plaintiff’s failure to comply with this Court’s Order to file a First Amended Complaint on or before
October 24, 2018 (Doc. 13) and to update his address (Doc. 9, pp. 7-8). See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b);
Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir.
1994). The dismissal counts as one of his three allotted “strikes” within the meaning of § 1915(g).
IT IS ALSO ORDERED that Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was
incurred at the time the action was filed, regardless of subsequent developments in the case.
Accordingly, 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). 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, 133 F.3d at 467. He must
list each of the issues he intends to appeal in the notice of appeal. Moreover, if the appeal is found
to be nonmeritorious, Plaintiff may also incur another “strike.” A proper and timely motion filed

2

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) may toll the 30-day appeal deadline. FED. R.
APP. P. 4(a)(4). A Rule 59(e) motion must be filed no more than twenty-eight (28) days after the
entry of 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: October 31, 2018
s/ J. PHIL GILBERT
District Judge
United States District Court

3