MARSHALL v. KAYBEE OF MACON

Opinion

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

KAREEM MARSHALL, Plaintiff, v. CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:23-cv-00416-TES KAYBEE OF MACON, EQUIFAX, and EMMETT L. GOODMAN JR. LLC, Defendants.

ORDER DISMISSING FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH A COURT ORDER

Pro se Plaintiff Kareem Marshall filed this lawsuit on October 20, 2023, against Defendants Kaybee of Macon, Equifax, and Emmett L. Goodman Jr. LLC. [Doc 1]. Plaintiff also filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) [Doc. 2], which the Court granted. See [Doc. 3, p. 2]. After screening his Complaint as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court ordered Plaintiff to amend his Complaint by November 14, 2023. [Id. at pp. 1, 6]. Because Plaintiff wholly failed to comply with the Court’s order, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s Complaint without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep’t, 205 F. App’x 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006). The Court ordered Plaintiff to amend his complaint by November 14, 2023. [Doc. 3]. In its order, the Court listed the deadline in bold font—not once, but twice. [Id. at pp. 1, 6]. The Court provided Plaintiff with a series of questions intended to assist him in replacing his extensive legal conclusions with factual allegations that might plausibly

state a claim for relief and survive the Court’s preliminary screening. [Id. at p. 5]. For example, the Court asked the basic questions: “What specifically did each defendant do (or not do) to violate his rights?” and “When did each action occur?” [Id.]. November 14

has come and gone, and Plaintiff has not amended his Complaint. Because Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s order to recast his complaint by November 14, 2023, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s action. See Brown,

205 F. App’x at 802. SO ORDERED, this 20th day of November, 2023. S/ Tilman E. Self, III TILMAN E. SELF, III, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT