Adreal Chloe Scott v. The State Board of Technical College of Georgia d/b/a Southern Crescent Technical College

• Court: District Court, M.D. Georgia
• Decided: November 12, 2025
• Docket: 5:25-cv-00358
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA MACON DIVISION

ADREAL CHLOE SCOTT, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:25-CV-358 (MTT) ) THE STATE BOARD OF TECHNICAL ) COLLEGE OF GEORGIA d/b/a ) SOUTHERN CRESCENT TECHNICAL ) COLLEGE , ) ) Defendant. ) )

ORDER Pro se plaintiff Adreal Chloe Scott filed this lawsuit against Southern Crescent Technical College.1 ECF 1; 3. Scott also moved to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). ECF 2. The Court granted Scott’s motion for leave to proceed IFP and ordered her to recast her amended complaint for screening by October 3, 2025. ECF 4. The time for compliance passed without a response from Scott. As a result, Scott was ordered to show cause why her lawsuit should not be dismissed for failing to follow the Court’s orders and instructions. ECF 5. Scott was given until November 4, 2025, to comply with the Court’s orders and instructions and warned that failure to comply could result in dismissal of this action. Id. The time for compliance has again passed without a response from Scott. As Scott was previously warned, the failure to comply with the Court’s orders and instructions is grounds for dismissing this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41; see also Brown

1 Scott amended her complaint once on September 9, 2025. ECF 3. Scott’s amended complaint is the operative complaint in this action. Hoefling v. City of Miami, 811 F.3d 1271, 1277 (11th Cir. 2016) (holding that the filing of an amended pleading renders the previous pleading a “legal nullity”). v. Tallahassee Police Dep't, 205 F. App'x 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006) (“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citing Lopez v. Aransas Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 1978))2. Accordingly, Scott’s amended complaint (ECF 3) is DISMISSED without

prejudice. SO ORDERED, this 12th day of November, 2025. S/ Marc T. Treadwell MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2 The Eleventh Circuit has adopted as binding precedent the decisions of the former Fifth Circuit rendered prior to October 1, 1981. Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc).