Ryan Christopher Cheatham v. Tim Easley, et al.

• Court: District Court, D. Kansas
• Decided: January 7, 2026
• Docket: 5:25-cv-03218
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

RYAN CHRISTOPHER CHEATHAM,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 25-3218-JWL

TIM EASLEY, et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff and state prisoner Ryan Christopher Cheatham filed this pro se civil action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff is currently incarcerated at El Dorado Correctional Facility (“EDCF”) in El Dorado, Kansas and he has been granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 8.) In an order issued on November 20, 2025, the Court assessed an initial partial filing fee of $23.00, due on or before December 22, 2025. Id. at 3. Plaintiff was expressly cautioned: “Any objection to this order or motion for extension of time to pay the initial partial filing fee must be filed on or before the date payment is due. The failure to pay the fee as directed will result in the dismissal of this matter without further notice.” Id. The Court has yet to receive payment of the initial partial filing fee and, although Plaintiff has filed two motions in the time since the initial partial filing fee was assessed, Plaintiff has not moved for an extension of time in which to pay the initial partial filing fee. Normally, the Court would dismiss this matter without further prior notice to Plaintiff because he has failed to comply with a court order. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); See also Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003) (noting that Rule 41(b) “has long been interpreted to permit courts to dismiss actions sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure . . . to comply with the . . . court’s orders”). But the Court has already once dismissed this case for failure to comply with a court order that directed Plaintiff to submit an inmate account statement. (See Doc. 8, p. 1-2.) The Court vacated the dismissal and reopened the case after Plaintiff filed a motion to reconsider in which he informed the Court that he had asked EDCF staff to e-file the statement and “he was assured by staff that it was filed” five days before the deadline. Id. at 2.

In light of these events, the Court is hesitant to again dismiss this matter based on Plaintiff’s apparent failure to comply with a court order. Accordingly, the Court will grant Plaintiff additional time in which to submit payment of the initial partial filing fee or to provide further information about his efforts to do so. For example, if Plaintiff timely submitted a request for EDCF or the Kansas Department of Corrections’ Centralized Inmate Banking to submit payment of the initial partial filing fee on Plaintiff’s behalf, Plaintiff should so inform the Court and provide any documentation he has of such a request.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff is granted to and including February 2,

2026 in which to either pay the initial partial filing fee of $23.00 or submit to the Court a written response to this order detailing his efforts to pay the initial partial filing fee. The failure to comply with this order will result in the dismissal of this matter without further prior notice to Plaintiff.

IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated January 7, 2026, in Kansas City, Kansas. S/ John W. Lungstrum JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE