McClain v. Fate et al
Filing
19
ORDER dismissing 1 Complaint without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 2/9/2016. (mwal)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Daniel R. McClain,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
Mr. Lefford Fate, Med. Director,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________________ )
C/A No. 0:15-4516-MBS
ORDER
Plaintiff Daniel R. McClain, a self-represented state prisoner, filed a Complaint pursuant to
42 U.S.C. § 1983 alleging a violation of his constitutional rights. On December 11, 2015, the court
issued an order allowing Plaintiff an opportunity to submit the service documents necessary to bring
the case into proper form for evaluation and possible service of process as to Defendant Fate.1 ECF
No. 8. Plaintiff was warned that failure to provide the necessary information within a specific time
period would subject the case to dismissal. However, Plaintiff failed to respond to the court’s order
or provide the service documents necessary to advance this case, and the time for response has
lapsed. As Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this case and has failed to comply with an order of this
court, the case is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626 (1962).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
February 9, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina
1
/s/ Margaret B. Seymour
Senior United States District Judge
All other defendants named in the Complaint were dismissed from this case without
prejudice by an order issued on January 14, 2016. ECF No. 15.
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order within the time period
set forth under Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
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?