Garrett, et al v. State of Illinois et al

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - Plaintiff's Complaint 1 is dismissed for want of prosecution. A separate Judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Senior Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party)(MKR)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
JOHNNY GARRETT,
Plaintiff,
v.
STATE OF ILLINOIS, ATTORNEY
GENERAL-RESPONDENT, and
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF
ILLINOIS-DEFENDANTS,
Defendants.

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

4:14CV3145

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On July 7, 2014, Plaintiff filed his
Complaint in this matter. (Filing No. 1.) However, Plaintiff failed to pay the filing and
administrative fees or file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (See Docket
Sheet.) On July 22, 2014, the court ordered Plaintiff to either tender the filing and
administrative fees to the Clerk of the Court or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis.
(Filing No. 4.) The court warned Plaintiff that failure to take either action by a specified date
would result in the dismissal of this matter without further notice. (Id.) Plaintiff did not tender
the filing and administrative fees or submit a request to proceed in forma pauperis.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1.

Plaintiff’s Complaint (Filing No. 1) is dismissed for want of prosecution.

2.

A separate Judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and

Order.
DATED this 3rd day of September, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
Richard G. Kopf
Senior United States District Judge
*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. The U.S. District Court for the District of
Nebraska does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their
Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. The court accepts no
responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user
to some other site does not affect the opinion of the court.