From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kidwell v. Hayden

United States District Court, District of Kansas
Nov 21, 2022
No. 22-3274-JWL-JPO (D. Kan. Nov. 21, 2022)

Opinion

22-3274-JWL-JPO

11-21-2022

RONALD LEE KIDWELL, Plaintiff, v. CALVIN HAYDEN, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Plaintiff, Ronald Lee Kidwell, is in custody at the Johnson County Adult Detention Center in Olathe, Kansas. Plaintiff filed this pro se civil rights action on October 24, 2022. The Court entered an Order (Doc. 4) denying Plaintiff's motion for 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 also granted Plaintiff until November 14, 2022, to submit the $402.00 filing fee. The Court's order provided 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. 4, at 2.)

Plaintiff has filed a response (Doc. 5) suggesting that the Court is enabling staff at the Johnson County Sheriff's Office to violate inmates' civil and constitutional rights. Nothing in the response suggests that Plaintiff is in imminent danger of serious physical injury. Plaintiff has failed to pay the filing fee by the deadline set forth in the order.

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

Kidwell v. Hayden

United States District Court, District of Kansas
Nov 21, 2022
No. 22-3274-JWL-JPO (D. Kan. Nov. 21, 2022)
Case details for

Kidwell v. Hayden

Case Details

Full title:RONALD LEE KIDWELL, Plaintiff, v. CALVIN HAYDEN, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, District of Kansas

Date published: Nov 21, 2022

Citations

No. 22-3274-JWL-JPO (D. Kan. Nov. 21, 2022)