Strobel v. United States of America

CourtDistrict Court, D. Kansas
DecidedJuly 25, 2024
Docket5:24-cv-03105
StatusUnknown

This text of Strobel v. United States of America (Strobel v. United States of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Strobel v. United States of America, (D. Kan. 2024).

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

NICHOLAS ROBERT STROBEL,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 24-3105-JWL

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff, a federal prisoner, brings this pro se civil rights action under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). Plaintiff is incarcerated at FCI-Leavenworth in Leavenworth, Kansas (“FCIL”), formerly named USP Leavenworth (“USPL”). Plaintiff’s Complaint, consisting of 262 pages, is not on a Court- approved form. On June 25, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and assessed an initial partial filing fee in the amount of $15.50, calculated under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). (Doc. 5.) The order provides that the failure to pay the initial partial filing fee or file an objection by July 9, 2024, “may result in the dismissal of this matter without further notice.” Id. Plaintiff has failed to pay the fee or file an objection by the Court’s deadline. Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “authorizes a district court, upon a defendant’s motion, to order the dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or ‘a court order.’” Young v. U.S., 316 F. App’x 764, 771 (10th Cir. 2009) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)). “This rule has been interpreted as permitting district courts to dismiss actions sua sponte when one of these conditions is met.” Id. (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630–31 (1962); Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)). “In addition, it is well established in this circuit that a district court is not obligated to follow any particular procedures when dismissing an action without prejudice under Rule 41(b).” Young, 316 F. App’x at 771–72 (citations omitted). Plaintiff has failed to submit the initial partial filing fee or to file an objection by the Court’s deadline.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT this matter is dismissed without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated July 25, 2024, in Kansas City, Kansas. S/ John W. Lungstrum JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Link v. Wabash Railroad
370 U.S. 626 (Supreme Court, 1962)
Olsen v. Mapes
333 F.3d 1199 (Tenth Circuit, 2003)
Young v. United States
316 F. App'x 764 (Tenth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Strobel v. United States of America, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strobel-v-united-states-of-america-ksd-2024.