KEJUAN JENKINS v. STEVEN REID, TYLER PEDROLEY, DALTON ROBERT

S.D. Illinois

KEJUAN JENKINS v. STEVEN REID, TYLER PEDROLEY, DALTON ROBERT

DecidedOctober 21, 2025

Docket3:24-cv-01488

StatusUnknown

This text of KEJUAN JENKINS v. STEVEN REID, TYLER PEDROLEY, DALTON ROBERT (KEJUAN JENKINS v. STEVEN REID, TYLER PEDROLEY, DALTON ROBERT) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

KEJUAN JENKINS v. STEVEN REID, TYLER PEDROLEY, DALTON ROBERT, (S.D. Ill. 2025).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

KEJUAN JENKINS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) Case No. 24-cv-1488-DWD STEVEN REID, ) TYLER PEDROLEY, ) DALTON ROBERT, ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DUGAN, District Judge: On August 20, 2025, the Court denied the defendants Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Exhaustion (Doc. 80) and it invited the Defendants to seek a Pavey hearing if they wished to further pursue the issue. (Doc. 88). On September 3, 2025, the Defendants’ filed a Motion (Doc. 89) seeking a Pavey hearing. Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated, but he previously updated his mailing address with the Court, so the Court issued an order on September 16, 2025, directing Plaintiff to provide an email address so that it could supply a link for the Pavey hearing. Plaintiff was to supply his address by October 7, 2025. The Court has not received anything further from Plaintiff. It appears that Plaintiff has simply abandoned this case, given his lack of communication with the Court about his ability to participate in the Pavey hearing. If a Plaintiff abandons a case or fails to follow a Court order, the case may be subject to dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); James v. McDonald’s Corp., 417 F.3d 672, 681 (7th Cir. 2005) (under Rule 41(b) a court has authority to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute if a party does not provide a timely response

to a court order). Given that Plaintiff has abandoned this case, the Court now finds it appropriate to dismiss this matter for failure to prosecute. This matter is dismissed with prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. The Clerk is also DIRECTED to enter judgment and to CLOSE this case. Defendants’ Motion for a Pavey hearing (Doc. 89) is DENIED as MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 21, 2025 /s David W. Dugan ___________________________ DAVID W. DUGAN United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

KEJUAN JENKINS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) Case No. 24-cv-1488-DWD STEVEN REID, ) TYLER PEDROLEY, ) DALTON ROBERT, ) ) Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

DUGAN, District Judge: On August 20, 2025, the Court denied the defendants Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Exhaustion (Doc. 80) and it invited the Defendants to seek a Pavey hearing if they wished to further pursue the issue. (Doc. 88). On September 3, 2025, the Defendants’ filed a Motion (Doc. 89) seeking a Pavey hearing. Plaintiff is no longer incarcerated, but he previously updated his mailing address with the Court, so the Court issued an order on September 16, 2025, directing Plaintiff to provide an email address so that it could supply a link for the Pavey hearing. Plaintiff was to supply his address by October 7, 2025. The Court has not received anything further from Plaintiff. It appears that Plaintiff has simply abandoned this case, given his lack of communication with the Court about his ability to participate in the Pavey hearing. If a Plaintiff abandons a case or fails to follow a Court order, the case may be subject to dismissal. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); James v. McDonald’s Corp., 417 F.3d 672, 681 (7th Cir. 2005) (under Rule 41(b) a court has authority to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute if a party does not provide a timely response

to a court order). Given that Plaintiff has abandoned this case, the Court now finds it appropriate to dismiss this matter for failure to prosecute. This matter is dismissed with prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. The Clerk is also DIRECTED to enter judgment and to CLOSE this case. Defendants’ Motion for a Pavey hearing (Doc. 89) is DENIED as MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: October 21, 2025 /s David W. Dugan ___________________________ DAVID W. DUGAN United States District Judge

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

KEJUAN JENKINS v. STEVEN REID, TYLER PEDROLEY, DALTON ROBERT, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kejuan-jenkins-v-steven-reid-tyler-pedroley-dalton-robert-ilsd-2025.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack