Gibbs v. Lee et al

Filing 11

ORDER OF DISMISSAL - dismissing as moot 6 Motion, document 10 is DENIED; case is DISMISSED without prejudice. Signed by District Judge Debra M. Brown on 9/26/17. (cr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
GREENVILLE DIVISION
HENRY GIBBS, JR.

PLAINTIFF

V.

NO. 4:16-CV-205-DMB-DAS

SUPERINTENDENT EARNEST LEE, et al.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER OF DISMISSAL
On May 12, 2017, the Court entered an order denying Henry Gibbs, Jr.’s motion to proceed
in forma pauperis on the grounds that Gibbs had accumulated three strikes under 28 U.S.C. §
1915(g) and could not satisfy the statute’s imminent danger requirement based on an allegation
“that he is at risk of organ failure due to ‘toxic smokes’ from inmate drug use.” Doc. #8. Having
denied Gibbs in forma pauperis status, the Court ordered Gibbs “to pay the required filing fee
within twenty-one (21) days” of the order and warned that the “failure to comply will subject his
complaint to dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a court order
without further notice.” Id.
Rather than pay the required filing fee, on June 5, 2017, Gibbs filed “Objections to This
Court’s Order Denying My In Forma Pauperis,” which is in substance a motion for
reconsideration. Doc. #10. Gibbs’ “Objections” reassert the same argument rejected in this
Court’s previous order – that inmate contraband is causing him harm. Id. Because “[a] motion
for reconsideration may not be used to rehash rejected arguments,” 1 Gibbs’ request for
reconsideration [10] is DENIED. Furthermore, given Gibbs’ failure to pay the filing fee within
the time set by the Court’s May 12 order,2 this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure
1
2

LeClerc v. Webb, 419 F.3d 405, 412 n.13 (5th Cir. 2005).

“Merely filing a motion for reconsideration does not stay an impe[n]ding deadline.” In re Republic of Ecuador, No.
C-10-80225, 2011 WL 736868, at *4 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 22, 2011) (citing Maness v. Meyers, 419 U.S. 449, 458 (1975)).

to prosecute and for failure to comply with an order of the Court under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 41(b). Accordingly, Gibbs’ pending motion for injunctive relief [6] is DISMISSED
as moot.
SO ORDERED, this, the 26th day of September, 2017.
/s/Debra M. Brown
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE