Hamell-El v. United States of America

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION

GARY HAMELL-EL, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 4:20-cv-01471-MTS ) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and ) FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS, ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on review of the file. Defendants filed a timely Motion to Dismiss, Doc. [10], on April 20, 2021. Plaintiff failed to file a response, and his time to do so has expired. See E.D. Mo. L.R. 4.01(B). As a pro se litigant, Plaintiff may be unfamiliar with the local rules and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but pro se litigants still must abide by them. In re Harris, 277 F. App’x 645 (8th Cir. 2008) (noting “even pro se litigants must comply with court rules and directives”) (citing Soliman v. Johanns, 412 F.3d 920, 921–22 (8th Cir. 2005)). Because of Plaintiff’s pro se status, however, the Court will provide him with another “opportunity to meet deadlines and conscientiously prosecute h[is] case.” See Burrow v. Boeing Co., No. 4:09-cv-2073-TCM, 2010 WL 4272756, at *3 (E.D. Mo. Oct. 25, 2010). Failure to respond to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss or to comply with future deadlines may result in the Court dismissing this case. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Gary Hamell-E] shall respond to Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, Doc. [10], within ten (10) days of the date of this Order. Dated this 13th day of May, 2021. TRMEW T. SCHELP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

_2-