Patterson v. Henderson County Det.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ASHEVILLE DIVISION 1:23-cv-268-RJC

TONY MICHAEL PATTERSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) HENDERSON COUNTY DET., et al., ) ORDER ) Defendants. ) ___________________________________ )

THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte. The pro se Plaintiff filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 addressing an incident that allegedly occurred at the Henderson County Detention Center. [Doc. 1]. On February 2, 2024, the Court dismissed the Complaint on initial review, and granted the Plaintiff 30 days to file a superseding Amended Complaint. [Doc. 12]. The Plaintiff was cautioned that, “[s]hould Plaintiff fail to timely file an Amended Complaint in accordance with this Order, this action will be dismissed without prejudice and without further notice to Plaintiff.” [Id. at 6]. The Plaintiff has not amended his Complaint and the time to do so has expired. The Plaintiff appears to have abandoned this action and the Court is unable to proceed. This case will therefore be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any claim against it.”); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-33 (1962) (although Rule 41(b) does not expressly provide for sua sponte dismissal, Rule 41(b) does not imply any such restriction and a court has the inherent power to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution or violation of a court order). IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to terminate this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed: March 29, 2024

Otef$ 4 Cr Of Robert J. Conrad, Jr. ee United States District Judge “ee