Johnson v. Office of the Attorney General State of Florida

Opinion

United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Michael D. Johnson, Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Ashley Moody, Office of the Civil Action No. 22-22873 -Civ-Scola Attorney General State of Florida, ) and others, Defendants. ) Order Dismissing Case Previously, the Court reviewed Plaintiff Michael D. Johnson’s complaint and concluded that it was a shotgun pleading and that the Court was unable to discern whether he had alleged facts stating a plausible claim for relief. (Order, ECF No. 4.) Accordingly, the Court ordered Johnson to file an amended complaint, by October 12, 2022, if he wished to proceed further with his case. The Court forewarned Johnson that his failure to timely to do so could result in the dismissal of his case. Since then, Johnson has filed a motion seeking referral to the volunteer attorney program (ECF NO. 5) but has not submitted an amended complaint and the deadline to do so has long since passed. A district court may dismiss a case, on its own initiative, if a plaintiff abandons her prosecution of the suit. Compare Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) with Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962). Courts are vested with this inherent power “to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases” and “to clear their calendars of cases that have remained dormant because of the inaction or dilatoriness of the parties seeking relief.” Link, 370 U.S. at 630-31. The Court finds Johnson, by failing to file an amended complaint, has abandoned his prosecution of this matter. The Court therefore dismisses this case without prejudice, and directs the Clerk of the Court to close the matter. Any pending motions are denied as moot. Done and ordered, at Miami, Florida, on November 2, 2022.

Robert N. Scola, Jr. United States District Judge