Riddle v. Riddle

Filing 11

ORDER: Because the plaintiff failed to comply with the Court's order and failed to take the necessary steps to prosecute this action, the complaint is hereby DISMISSED. Further, the Clerk is DIRECTED to unseal the document filed at docket entry no. 10. It is so ORDERED. Signed by District Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 6/6/13. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(tmw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION

TIMOTHY GLENN RIDDLE,
Plaintiff,
v.
JAMES WALLACE RIDDLE,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 3:13-cv-327
Judge Sharp

ORDER
On April 15, 2013, the Court entered an order denying denied plaintiff Timothy Glenn Riddle’s
application to proceed in forma pauperis and notifying the plaintiff that he did not have standing to bring a
criminal action in this Court. (ECF No. 3.) In the same order, the Court provided notice that failure either
to submit a complete and accurate Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or
Costs or the applicable filing fee within 30 days of entry in that order would result in dismissal of the
action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the Court’s order.
The Court entered an order denying the plaintiff’s motion to reconsider on April 30, 2013. (ECF
No. 7.) Despite the Court’s again giving notice in that order that the plaintiff, as a private citizen, had no
authority or standing to institute a federal criminal prosecution as a “private indictor” (see id. at 1–2
(collecting cases)), the plaintiff thereafter filed a document “Sealed Indictment: Private Prosecution
Indictor Timothy Glenn Riddle.” (ECF No. 10.)
In short, although the plaintiff was forewarned that failure to comply with the Court’s directive
would result in the dismissal of the plaintiff’s claims, more than thirty days have now passed since entry of
the order denying the motion to reconsider, without the plaintiff’s having submitted either a completed
application to proceed in forma pauperis or the required filing fee.
Because the plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s order and failed to take the necessary steps
to prosecute this action, the complaint is hereby DISMISSED.

2

Further, the Clerk is DIRECTED to unseal the document filed at docket entry no. 10.
It is so ORDERED.

Kevin H. Sharp
United States District Judge