Opinion
CV417-154
09-12-2018
ERIC LATROY HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. SCMPD (CNT AGENTS), Defendants.
ORDER
The Court directed pro se plaintiff Eric Harris to file an Amended Complaint, based upon information about the officers involved in his arrest who allegedly subjected him to excessive force. Doc. 36. When he failed adequately to do so, the Court gave Harris another chance. Doc. 39 (ordering Harris to file an Amended Complaint within 30 days of service of the Order identifying the officers involved in the incident by name, with factual allegations set forth against each of them, or face a recommendation of dismissal). He has filed no response at all to that Order but has filed a change of address, raising a concern that he may not have received it. Doc. 40; see also Georgia v. Harris, SPCR17-2068-J4 (Chatham Super. Ct.) (case status closed, confinement and probation ordered). It is therefore unclear whether Harris intends to proceed with his case.
Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, plaintiff shall (1) file his Amended Complaint, complying with the requirements set forth in the Court's July 30, 2018 Order, or (2) face a recommendation of dismissal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (authorizing district courts to dismiss an action for failure to obey a court order); L.R. 41.1(c) (authorizing district court to dismiss for lack of prosecution); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (courts have the inherent authority to dismiss claims for lack of prosecution); Collins v. Lake Helen, L.P., 249 F. App'x 116, 120 (11th Cir. 2007) ("[D]istrict court[s] possesses the inherent power to police [their] docket[s]" and to prune out those cases left to languish by their litigants).
SO ORDERED, this 12th day of September, 2018.
/s/_________
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA