From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cooley v. City of Lawrence

United States District Court, District of Kansas
Dec 2, 2024
No. 24-3191-JWL (D. Kan. Dec. 2, 2024)

Opinion

24-3191-JWL

12-02-2024

TONY ALLEN COOLEY, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF LAWRENCE, KANSAS, et al., Defendants.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff, Tony Allen Cooley, who is currently in custody at the Douglas County Jail in Lawrence, Kansas, brings this pro se civil rights case under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On October 29, 2024, the Court entered a Memorandum and Order (Doc. 3) (“M&O”) denying Plaintiff leave to proceed in forma pauperis, finding Plaintiff is subject to the “three-strikes” provision under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The Court examined the Complaint and found no showing of imminent danger of serious physical injury. The Court granted Plaintiff until November 29, 2024, to submit the $405.00 filing fee. The M&O provides that “[t]he failure to submit the fee by that date will result in the dismissal of this matter without prejudice and without additional prior notice.” (Doc. 3, at 3.) Plaintiff has failed to pay the filing fee by the deadline set forth in the M&O.

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 Fed.Appx. 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 Fed.Appx. at 771-72 (citations omitted).

Plaintiff has failed to pay the filing fee by the deadline set forth in the Court's order. As a consequence, the Court dismisses this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to comply with court orders.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED BY THE COURT that this action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Cooley v. City of Lawrence

United States District Court, District of Kansas
Dec 2, 2024
No. 24-3191-JWL (D. Kan. Dec. 2, 2024)
Case details for

Cooley v. City of Lawrence

Case Details

Full title:TONY ALLEN COOLEY, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF LAWRENCE, KANSAS, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, District of Kansas

Date published: Dec 2, 2024

Citations

No. 24-3191-JWL (D. Kan. Dec. 2, 2024)