Knight v. Walton Cnty. Jail

Full title: TERESA KNIGHT, Petitioner, v. WALTON COUNTY JAIL, Respondent.

Court: United States District Court, Middle District of Georgia

Date published: Jan 8, 2024

3:23-CV-00117-CDL-CHW (M.D. Ga. Jan. 8, 2024)

Opinion

3:23-CV-00117-CDL-CHW

01-08-2024

TERESA KNIGHT, Petitioner, v. WALTON COUNTY JAIL, Respondent.

CLAY D. LAND, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

ORDER

CLAY D. LAND, JUDGE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Pro se Petitioner Teresa Knight filed a petition for federal habeas corpus relief. ECF No. 1. She did not pay the filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. On November 9, 2023, Petitioner was ordered to pay the filing fee or if indigent, file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. ECF No. 3. Petitioner was further ordered to recast her petition and provided instructions on how to do so. Id. 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 December 14, 2023, the Court notified Petitioner that it had not received a response and ordered her 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 would be dismissed if she failed to respond. Id. Petitioner was given fourteen (14) days to respond and she failed to do so.

Due to Petitioner's failure to follow the Court's orders and her 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 court order to file amended complaint where order expressly informed prisoner of deficiencies in his complaint and rules that he needed to follow in filing amended complaint).

SO ORDERED