Sealed v. Sealed
Filing
18
MEMORANDUM OPINION by Senior Judge John G. Heyburn II. Plaintiff having failed to comply with an Order of this Court, the action will be dismissed by separate Order. cc: Plaintiff, pro se (JLS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY
AT LOUISVILLE
I: A MAN; PROSECUTOR
a/k/a DANIEL-DALE from the FAMILY of [CHRISTISON]
v.
PLAINTIFF
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13CV-1162-H
MISTER KEVIN JAGGERS, ATTORNEY et al.
DEFENDANTS
MEMORANDUM OPINION
By Memorandum and Order entered February 6, 2014, the Court denied two virtually
identical motions for waiver of fees filed by Plaintiff “Daniel-Dale From the Family of
[Christison].” The Court ordered that within 30 days from entry of the Memorandum and Order,
that Plaintiff shall either (1) pay in full the $400.00 fee for filing a civil complaint; or
(2) file a fully completed Court-supplied, non-prisoner application to proceed without
prepayment of fees and affidavit. The Court warned Plaintiff that failure to comply with the
Memorandum and Order within the time allotted would result in dismissal of the action for
failure to prosecute. Well over 30 days have passed, and a review of the docket sheet reveals
that Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s Order.
Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure authorizes the involuntary dismissal
of an action if a plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with an order of the court. See Jourdan
v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 109 (6th Cir. 1991) (“Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) recognizes the power of the
district court to enter a sua sponte order of dismissal.”). Although federal courts afford pro se
litigants some leniency on matters that require legal sophistication, such as formal pleading rules,
the same policy does not support leniency from court deadlines and other procedures readily
understood by laypersons, particularly where there is a pattern of delay or failure to pursue a
case. See Jourdan, 951 F.2d at 110.
Plaintiff having failed to comply with an Order of this Court, the action will be dismissed
by separate Order.
Date:
August 18, 2014
cc:
Plaintiff, pro se
4412.005
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?