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)
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?