Opinion
4:24-CV-00091-CDL-AGH
09-04-2024
JERRY HALL, Petitioner, v. Sheriff GREGORY COUNTRYMAN, Respondent.
ORDER
CLAY D. LAND, U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE.
Pro se Petitioner Jerry Hall, a pretrial detainee at the Muscogee County Jail in Columbus, Georgia, filed a petition for federal habeas corpus relief. ECF No. 1. However, he did not pay the $5.00 filing fee nor did he request to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee. On July 17, 2024, Petitioner was ordered to pay the filing fee or if indigent, file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 4. Petitioner was given fourteen (14) days to respond and was informed that failure to comply with an order of the Court could result in dismissal of this action. Id. Petitioner failed to respond.
Therefore, on August 13, 2024, the Court notified Petitioner that it had not received a response and ordered him to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the Court. ECF No. 4. The Court unambiguously informed Petitioner that this action could be dismissed if he failed to respond. Id. Petitioner was given fourteen (14) days to respond and he has failed to do so.
Due to Petitioner's failure to follow the Court's orders and his failure to prosecute this action, the case is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep't, 205 Fed.Appx. 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006) (citing Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) and Lopez v. Aransas Cty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 1978)) (“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”); Duong Thanh Ho v. Costello, 757 Fed.Appx. 912 (11th Cir. 2018) (holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in sua sponte dismissing without prejudice prisoner's Pro se § 1983 complaint for failure to comply with a court order).
SO ORDERED.