SLATER v. WILLIAMS

• Court: District Court, M.D. Georgia
• Decided: September 30, 2022
• Docket: 7:22-cv-00063
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA VALDOSTA DIVISION JOSEPH CHANCE SLATER, : Plaintiff, : VS. : NO. 7:22-CV-00063-WLS-TQL Officer WILLIAMS, ef al., Defendants.

ORDER Pro se Plaintiff Joseph Chance Slater, an inmate currently incarcerated at the Thomas County Jail in Thomasville, Georgia, has filed documents that have been docketed as a complaint and amended complaint seeking relief under 42 U.S.C, § 1983 (ECF Nos. 1, 3). On July 25, 2022, Plaintiff was ordered to recast his complaints on the Court’s standard form and submit a complete and proper motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, to include a certified copy of his prison trust account information. Plaintiff was given fourteen (14) days to comply, and he was warned that the failure to fully and timely comply with the Court’s orders and instructions could result in the dismissal of his Complaint. See generally Order, July 25, 2022, ECE No. 4. The time for compliance passed without a response from Plaintiff! As such, Plaintiff

was ordered to respond and show cause why his lawsuit should not be dismissed for failing to follow the Court’s orders and instructions. Plaintiff was again given fourteen (14) days to comply, and he was warned that the failure to timely and fully comply with the Court’s

orders and instructions would result in the dismissal of this action. See generally Order, Sept. 6, 2022, ECF No. 5. The time for compliance with the September 6, 2022 Order has now passed without a response from Plaintiff. Because Plaintiff has failed to compiy with the Court’s orders and instructions and otherwise failed to diligently prosecute his claims, this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41; see also Brown v, Tallahassee Police Dep't, 205 F. App'x 802, 802 (ith Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citing Lopez v. Aransas Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 370 F.2d 541, 544 (Sth Cir. 1978)).! 30th SO ORDERED, this “_ day of September, 2022.

W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

'In Bonner v, City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (Lith Cir. 1981) (en banc), the Eleventh Circuit adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to close of business on September 30, 1981.