Smith v. Livingston et al

Filing 12

MEMORANDUM on Dismissal. This action is dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution. (Signed by Judge Vanessa D Gilmore) Parties notified.(gclair, 4)

Download PDF
United States District Court Southern District of Texas ENTERED IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION MELVIN SMITH, (TDCJ-CID #2004066) Plaintiff, vs. BRAD LIVINGSTON, et al., Defendants. § § § § § § § § § § January 13, 2017 David J. Bradley, Clerk CIVIL ACTION H-16-2603 MEMORANDUM ON DISMISSAL The plaintiff has not responded to this court's order entered December 2, 2016, which required him to submit within thirty days a more definite statement of the facts on which his complaint is based. (Docket Entry No.9). The court's order specifically provided that "[f]ailure to comply as directed may result in the dismissal of this action." With regard to this court's Order for More Definite Statement, the court must have clear answers to each of its questions before it can evaluate the merits of the plaintiffs claims. The plaintiffs failure to comply with this court's order forces this court to conclude that he lacks due diligence. Under the inherent powers necessarily vested in a court to manage its own affairs, this court determines that dismissal for want of prosecution is appropriate. See FED. R. Civ. P. 41 (b); Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626 (1962); Woodson v. Surgitek, Inc., 57 F.3d 1406, 1417 (5th Cir. 1995); 8 J. MOOREET AL., MOORE'S FEDERAL PRACTICE§ 41.51(3)(b) & (e) (3d ed. 2010). Upon a proper showing, relief from this order may be granted in accordance with FED. R. CIV. P. 60(b). See Link, 370 U.S. at 635. 0 \RAO\VDG\2016\16-260J.dOI.\\pd This action is DISMISSED without prejudice for want of prosecution. SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on _ _,'Jif'IAtnNHl~...-~~3........._.2v;Q1tt-7~, VANESSA D. GILMORE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 0 \RAQ\VDG\2016\16-2603 dOl \\]XI 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?