Douglas, Roderick v. Wall, Edward et al

Filing 16

ORDER dismissing this case without prejudice for want of prosecution. The clerk's office shall terminate all pending motions and close this case. Douglas may seek leave to re-open this case only if he pays the initial partial filing fee within ten days of the date of this order. Otherwise, he must re-file his complaint for consideration in a new case if he wishes to proceed with his claims. Signed by District Judge William M. Conley on 1/23/2014. (jef),(ps)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN RODERICK D. DOUGLAS, Plaintiff, ORDER 13-cv-301-wmc v. EDWARD WALL, et al., Defendants. State inmate Roderick D. Douglas filed a proposed civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, concerning the conditions of his confinement. On June 27, 2013, the court ordered Douglas to make an initial partial payment of $1.60 toward the filing fee in compliance with the federal in Jonna pauperis statute and the Prison Litigation Reform Act ("PLRA"), 28 U.S.C. § l 915(b)( 1). To date, Douglas has failed to comply as directed. Accordingly, under the inherent power necessarily vested in a court to manage its own docket, the complaint will be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41 (b); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 3 70 U.S. 626, 630-31 ( 1962); Ohio River Co. v. Carrillo, 754 F.2d 236, 238 n.5 (7th Cir. 1984). ORDER IT IS ORDERED that: 1. The complaint filed by plaintiff Roderick D. Douglas is DISMISSED without prejudice for want of prosecution. pending motions and close this case. The clerk's office shall terminate all 2. Douglas may seek leave to re-open this case only if he pays the initial partial filing fee within ten days of the date of this order. Otherwise, he must re-file his complaint for consideration in a new case if he wishes to proceed with his claims. I Ente.red this 23rd day of January, 2014. BY THE COURT: Isl WILLIAM M. CONLEY District Judge 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?