Opinion
No. 5:19-cv-00255-MTT-CHW
10-23-2019
DELROY T. BOOTH, Plaintiff, v. WILLIAMS, et al., Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Pro se Plaintiff Delroy T. Booth, an inmate in Georgia State Prison in Reidsville, Georgia, filed a handwritten document, which was docketed in this Court as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 civil rights complaint. Compl., ECF No. 1. He did not, however, use the required § 1983 complaint form. See id. Moreover, although Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in this action, he did not file that motion on the proper form and he failed to include the proper documentation to support his motion. See Mot. for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, ECF No. 2.
As a result, Plaintiff was ordered to submit a properly completed 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint form and a new motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Order to Recast Compl., ECF No. 5. Plaintiff was given twenty-one days to comply and was cautioned that his failure to do so could result in the dismissal of this action. Id. Thereafter, Plaintiff did not comply with the order to recast his complaint and motion to proceed in forma pauperis on the proper forms.
Plaintiff was therefore ordered to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the Court's previous order. Order to Show Cause, ECF No. 6. Plaintiff was given twenty-one days to respond to the show cause order and was cautioned that his failure to do so would result in the dismissal of this action. Id.
More than twenty-one days have now passed since the order to show cause was entered, and Plaintiff has not responded to the show cause order. Thus, because Plaintiff has failed to respond to the Court's orders or otherwise prosecute his case, it is hereby ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep't, 205 F. App'x 802, 802 (11th 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 Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) and Lopez v. Aransas Cty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 1978)).
SO ORDERED, this 23rd day of October, 2019.
S/ Marc T. Treadwell
MARC T. TREADWELL, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT