Montgomery-Harbin v. Wilcher

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA SAVANNAH DIVISION

MICHAEL ) MONTGOMERY-HARBIN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CV423-229 ) SHERIFF JOHN T. ) WILCHER, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER Pro se plaintiff Michael Montgomery-Harbin filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging he was improperly detained at Chatham County Jail. See doc. 11 at 2-3. The Court screened his Complaint, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, and directed service upon Defendant Wilcher. Id. at 5. Wilcher has answered, doc. 19, and a schedule has been entered, doc. 20. However, Montgomery-Harbin has failed to keep the Court apprised of his current address. See docs. 21, 23, 24 & 25. The Court previously directed him to show cause why his case should not be dismissed for his failure to update his address and failure to prosecute this case. See doc. 22. He did not respond to that Order. See generally docket. His failure to update his address, in violation of the Local Rules, see S.D. Ga. L. Civ. R. 11.1, failure to respond to the Court’s Order, and failure to prosecute

this case merit dismissal. His Complaint is, therefore, DISMISSED. Doc. 1.

A district court retains the inherent power to police its docket and to enforce its orders. Link v. Wabash Railroad Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir.

1989); Jones v. Graham, 709 F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1983); Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dept., 205 F. App’x 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006). Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a complaint may be dismissed

either for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with an order of the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Additionally, this Court’s Local Rules provide that the Court may dismiss an action for want of prosecution

when a party has “willful[ly] disobe[yed] . . . any order of the Court” or for “[a]ny other failure to prosecute a civil action with reasonable promptness.” S.D. Ga. L.R. 41.1(b), (c). Montgomery-Harbin’s failure to

comply with the Court’s Order and the Local Rules, and his failure to prosecute this case warrant dismissal. Accordingly, his Complaint is DISMISSED for failing to obey a court order and failing to prosecute his

case. Doc. 1. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to CLOSE this case. SO ORDERED, this 16th day of February, 2024.

Lin. CHRISTOPHER L. RAY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA