Williams v. New Orleans Police Department

Filing 5

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3 . The Court finds that the dismissal should be without prejudice. See Millan v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 546 F.3d 321, 326-27 (5th Cir. 2008); Berry v. CIGNA/RSI-CIGNA, 975 F.2d 1188, 1191 (5th Cir. 1992). Accordingly, plaintiff's section 1983 complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Sarah S. Vance on 9/8/2017.(cg)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA
ARMAND JUDE WILLIAMS

CIVIL ACTION

VERSUS

NO. 17-5749

NEW ORLEANS POLICE
DEPARTMENT

SECTION “R” (2)
ORDER

Plaintiff Armand Jude Williams filed this pro se complaint pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983. Having reviewed de novo the complaint, 1 the record, and
the Magistrate Judge’s unopposed Findings and Recommendation, 2 the
Court approves the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion that plaintiff’s case should
be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
The Court finds that the dismissal should be without prejudice. See
Millan v. USAA Gen. Indem. Co., 546 F.3d 321, 326-27 (5th Cir. 2008); Berry
v. CIGNA/RSI-CIGNA, 975 F.2d 1188, 1191 (5th Cir. 1992). Accordingly,
plaintiff’s section 1983 complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
New Orleans, Louisiana, this _____ day of September, 2017.
8th
_____________________
SARAH S. VANCE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
1
2

R. Doc. 1.
R. Doc. 3.