Atwell v. Trooper James VanDike

Filing 3

MEMORANDUM. A judgment will enter signed by District Judge Curtis L Collier on 10/13/11. (JGK, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
at CHATTANOOGA
MEL LINDSEY ATWELL,
Plaintiff,
v.
TROOPER JAMES VANDIKE,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:11-cv-240
Chief Judge Curtis L. Collier

MEMORANDUM
Plaintiff Mel Lindsey Atwell (“Plaintiff”) is confined at Community Corporation of
American at Silverdale, in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Plaintiff has filed a pro se civil rights action
under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaining about alleged defamatory and slanderous testimony given by
Trooper James VanDike in a court proceeding in Grundy County (Court File No. 1).
On September 2, 2011, an Order directing Plaintiffs to either pay the $350.00 filing fee or
submit an in forma pauperis application along with a copy of his inmate trust account and a Prisoner
Account Statement Certificate, within thirty days from the filing date of the order, was mailed to
Plaintiff at the address which he provided to the Court—CCA Silverdale. As of October 13, 2011,
Plaintiff has failed to filed the necessary documents or respond to the Court’s September 2, 2011,
Order.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits the involuntary dismissal of a suit when a
plaintiff fails to prosecute his case. This authority is based on the Court’s inherent authority to
control its docket and prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases. Roadway Exp., Inc.
v. Piper, 447 U.S. 752, 765 (1980) (“‘The authority of a federal trial court to dismiss a plaintiff’s
action with prejudice because of his failure to prosecute cannot seriously be doubted. The power

to invoke this sanction is necessary in order to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending
cases and to avoid congestion in the calendars of the District Courts.’”) (quoting Link v. Wabash R.
Co., 370 U.S. 626, 632 (1962)). The Plaintiff’s failure to abide by the Court’s Order and the Court’s
interest in managing the docket weigh in favor of dismissal, as the Court cannot hold this case in
abeyance indefinitely based on Plaintiffs’ failure to timely file the required documents.
Plaintiff has given no indication he intends to proceed with this action. Rule 41(b) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure allows a court to dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to
prosecute or for failure to comply with the federal rules or any court order. This authority is based
on the Court’s inherent authority to control its docket and prevent undue delays in the disposition
of pending cases. Given the Plaintiff’s failure to abide by the Court’s Order, no lesser sanction than
dismissal is feasible.
Therefore, this action will be DISMISSED for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute and to comply
with the Orders of this Court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108 (6th Cir.
1991).
A judgment will enter.

/s/
CURTIS L. COLLIER
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2