Darryl McGore v. Bob Barker Company, et al.

• Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
• Decided: November 7, 2025
• Docket: 2:25-cv-12630
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

Darryl McGore,

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:25-cv-12630 District Judge Linda V. Parker v.

Bob Barker Company, et al.,

Defendants. _________________________________/

OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Plaintiff Darryl McGore, a prisoner in the custody of the Michigan Department of Corrections, filed a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No.1.) For the reasons stated below, the complaint is dismissed WITHOUT PREJUDICE. On September 2, 2025, Chief Magistrate Judge David R. Grand signed an order of deficiency in this case because Mr. McGore had neither paid the filing and administrative fees nor moved to proceed in forma pauperis. (ECF No. 5.) The order required him to file the proper documents or pay the filing fee within thirty days. (Id.) The order cautioned that failure to comply would result in dismissal of the case for want of prosecution. (Id.) While Mr. McGore did not correct the deficiency by October 2, 2025, the Court acknowledges that he attempted to correct the deficiency on October 10, 2025, by filing a prisoner trust fund account statement. (ECF No. 6.)

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) gives the district court power to dismiss a complaint where “the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with [the Federal Rules] or a court order.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). This rule provides the Court a tool

to effectively manage its docket. Knoll v. Am. Tel. & Tel. Co., 176 F.3d 359, 362- 63 (6th Cir. 1999) (citation omitted). Plaintiff did not comply with the deficiency order despite notice that noncompliance would result in dismissal. Therefore, the Court must dismiss the case WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See May v. Pike Lake State

Park, 8 F. App’x 507, 508 (6th Cir. 2001) (affirming dismissal of case for lack of prosecution where pro se litigant failed to comply with “readily comprehended” order).

Accordingly, the complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff may file a new civil rights complaint under a new case number provided he either: (a) file the necessary documentation to proceed in forma pauperis, or (b) pay the applicable filing and administrative fees.

SO ORDERED. s/ Linda V. Parker LINDA V. PARKER U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: November 7, 2025 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record and/or pro se parties on this date, November 7, 2025, by electronic and/or U.S. First Class mail.

s/Aaron Flanigan Case Manager