Opinion
4:22-CV-00437-KGB-JTR
06-30-2022
CHRISTOPHER OTIS PLAINTIFF v. CLARK, Sergeant, Pulaski County Detention Facility, et al. DEFENDANTS
RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
The following Recommended Disposition has been sent to United States District Judge Kristine G. Baker. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Recommendation. If you do not file objections, Judge Baker may adopt this Recommendation without independently reviewing all of the evidence in the record. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact.
I. Introduction
On May 10, 2022, Plaintiff Christopher Otis (“Otis”) and 19 other inmates in the Pulaski County Regional Detention Facility jointly filed a single pro se § 1983 Complaint alleging that Defendants violated their constitutional rights. Doc. 1. In accordance with the Court's general practice, the Clerk severed the joint Complaint into 20 individual § 1983 cases.
Willie C. Lovelace, Jerry W. West, Xavion Omoware, Jerry York, Brian Allen, Timothy D. Counts, Roderick D. Maxwell, Donald Slusher, Daniel Owen, Montrell Burns, Charles Horton, Quincy Harris, Derrick Conley, Adrian Jimenez, Antwan Conley, Reginald Crusterson, Jobani Rodriguez, Pedro Ramirez, and Travion Hamilton.
See Case Nos. 4:22-cv-00425-KGB-JTR through 4:22-cv-00444-KGB-JTR.
II. Discussion
On May 13, 2022, I entered an Order giving Otis 30 days to either: (1) pay the $402 filing fee, in full; or (2) file an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“IFP”). Doc. 2. Importantly, Otis was cautioned that if he failed to timely comply with the Order, his case would be dismissed. Id. at 3. Otis has not complied with the May 13th Order, and the time to do so has expired. Accordingly, his case should be dismissed, without prejudice, pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).
In relevant part, Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) states: “If any communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is not responded to within thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed without prejudice.”
III. Conclusion
IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT Otis's Complaint be DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.