Tyler v. Mayo et al

Filing 10

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - This matter is dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to prosecute this matter diligently and failed to comply with this court's orders. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order. Ordered by Chief Judge Joseph F. Bataillon. (Copy mailed/e-mailed to pro se party)(KBJ)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
BILLY TYLER,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
UNKNOWN MAYO, deputy U.S.
Marshals, and UNKNOWN LEWIS, deputy
U.S. Marshals,
Defendants.

8:11CV167

MEMORANDUM
AND ORDER

This matter is before the court on its own motion. On July 15, 2011, the court conducted an
initial review of Plaintiff’s Complaint and concluded that it failed to state a claim upon which relief
may be granted. (Filing No. 9.) However, the court gave Plaintiff the opportunity to file an amended
complaint. (Id. at CM/ECF pp. 4-5.) In doing so, the court warned Plaintiff that if he failed to file
an amended complaint by August 15, 2011, his claims would be dismissed without further notice.
(Id.) Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint by the court’s deadline. (See Docket Sheet.)
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:
1. This matter is dismissed without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to prosecute this matter
diligently and failed to comply with this court’s orders.
2. A separate judgment will be entered in accordance with this Memorandum and Order.
DATED this 24th day of August, 2011.
BY THE COURT:
s/ Joseph F. Bataillon
Chief United States District Judge

*This opinion may contain hyperlinks to other documents or W eb 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.