Opinion
23-3110-JWL
06-01-2023
CHRISTOPHER BECTON, Plaintiff, v. (FNU) SCHROER, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Plaintiff Christopher Becton, a state inmate currently housed at the Douglas County Jail in Lawrence, Kansas, brought this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1.) The Court received the complaint on April 20, 2023. The same day, the Court issued a notice of deficiency (NOD) informing Plaintiff that although he had submitted a motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2), he had failed to submit the required financial information. (Doc. 3.) The NOD further advised Plaintiff that if he “fail[ed] to comply within the prescribed time, . . . this action may be dismissed without further notice for failure to comply with this court order.” Id. at 1-2. The deadline for compliance was May 22, 2023. Id. at 2.
The deadline has passed and Plaintiff has not complied with the NOD, nor has he filed anything further in this matter. Under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a district court may dismiss an action “if the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order.” 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”). Because Plaintiff has failed to comply with the NOD and has failed to file anything further in this matter, the Court concludes that this matter should be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT the motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 2) is denied and this matter is dismissed without prejudice under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) for failure to comply with a court order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.