Mills v. Lumpkin

Filing 5

MEMORANDUM ON DISMISSAL. Case is dismissed without prejudice. Any pending motions are denied as moot. COA is denied. (Signed by Judge Lee H Rosenthal) Parties notified.(GabrielleLyons, 4)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
JAMES ADDISON MILLS,
SPN # 00569051
Petitioner,
v.
BOBBY LUMPKIN,
Respondent.

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

February 06, 2024
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk

CIVIL ACTION NO. H-23-4551

MEMORANDUM ON DISMISSAL
James Addison Mills, representing himself, filed a hand-written petition for a writ of
habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On December 6, 2023, the Clerk’s Office entered a notice
of deficient pleading instructing Mills to pay the filing fee or file an application for leave to proceed
without prepayment of fees, accompanied by a certified statement of his inmate trust account,
within 30 days. (Docket Entry No. 3). Mills was also instructed to file his claims on a court
approved form. (Id.). The deadline for compliance has expired and Mills has not complied with
the Clerk’s directive. Mills submitted his claims on a court approved form, (see Docket Entry No.
4), but he has not paid the filing fee or filed an application for leave to proceed without prepayment
of fees accompanied by a certified statement of his inmate trust account.
A district court may dismiss a lawsuit for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 41(b). See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). “This authority is based on the courts’ power to
manage and administer their own affairs to ensure the orderly and expeditious disposition of
cases.” Lewis v. Sheriff’s Dept. Bossier Parish, 478 F. App’x 809, 815 (5th Cir. 2012) (per curiam)
(internal quotation marks and citation omitted); see also Gates v. Strain, 885 F.3d 874 (5th Cir.
2018) (explaining that a district court may dismiss an action for failure to prosecute);

Nottingham v. Warden, Bill Clements Unit, 837 F.3d 438, 440–41 (5th Cir. 2016) (explaining that
a district court may dismiss an action for failure to comply with court orders).
Mills’s failure to comply with the notice of deficient pleading forces the court to conclude
that he lacks diligence in prosecuting this action. Under the court’s general power to manage its
docket, this case is dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution. Mills is advised that he
may obtain relief from this order if he makes a proper showing under Rule 60(b) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. At a minimum, a proper showing under Rule 60(b) includes payment
of the filing fee or submission of an application for leave to proceed without prepayment of fees
accompanied by a certified statement of his inmate trust account.
This case is dismissed without prejudice. Any pending motions are denied as moot, and a
certificate of appealability is denied.
SIGNED on February 6, 2024, at Houston, Texas.

_______________________________________
Lee H. Rosenthal
United States District Judge

2