Summary
affirming dismissal without prejudice where self-represented plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint despite being cautioned that dismissal could result from failure to do so
Summary of this case from Williams v. KeenOpinion
No. 14-2885
03-17-2015
Terrance Alfonzo Dudley, Plaintiff - Appellant, v. Eddie Miles; Tom Roy; Paige Lemay; Joseph Langevin; Adam Lynch; Officer Rosemary Andrews; John Ratcliffe; John Wing; Craig S. Oseland; Rick Raven; Lcie Stevenson; Jo Earhart; Shannon Reimann; Matthew Peterson; Dan Grzywinski; Michelle Hallman; Mr. Gullette; Frank Barr, in their individual and official capacities, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis [Unpublished] Before LOKEN, COLLOTON, and BENTON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.
Terrance Dudley appeals the district court's dismissal of his pro se 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint for failure to comply with a court order, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). We grant Dudley leave to appeal in forma pauperis, leaving fee collection to the district court. See Henderson v. Norris, 129 F.3d 481, 484-85 (8th Cir. 1997) (per curiam). We conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion. See Smith v. Gold Dust Casino, 526 F.3d 402, 404-05 (8th Cir. 2008). Despite warnings that dismissal could result from his failure to do so, Dudley did not follow the magistrate judge's order to file an amended complaint. See In re Reid, 197 F.3d 318, 320 (8th Cir. 1999). We note the dismissal was without prejudice, which leaves Dudley free to refile his claims. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).
The Honorable David S. Doty, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Jeanne J. Graham, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.