Opinion
5:24-CV-00009-CAR-TQL
04-09-2024
BRANDON LOVE, Plaintiff, v. MACON STATE PRISON, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
C. ASHLEY ROYAL, SENIOR JUDGE
Presently pending before the Court is a Complaint filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by pro se Plaintiff Brandon Love, an inmate currently incarcerated in the Macon State Prison in Oglethorpe, Georgia (ECF No. 1). On January 24, 2024, Plaintiff was ordered to either pay the Court's filing fee in full or submit a complete and proper motion for leave to proceed without payment of the filing fee, to include a certified copy of his prison trust fund account information. Plaintiff was given fourteen (14) days to comply, and he was warned that the failure to fully and timely comply with the Court's orders and instructions could result in the dismissal of his Complaint. See generally Order, Jan. 24, 2024, ECF No. 4.
The time for compliance passed, and Plaintiff did not comply. As such, Plaintiff was ordered to respond and show cause why this case should not be dismissed for the failure to comply with the Court's previous orders and instructions. Plaintiff was again given fourteen (14) days to respond, and he was again warned that the failure to comply with the Court's orders and instructions would result in the dismissal of his Complaint. See generally Order, Feb. 26, 2024, ECF No. 6.
The time for compliance has again passed without a response from Plaintiff. As Plaintiff was previously warned, the failure to comply with the Court's orders and instructions is grounds for dismissing this case. This action is therefore DISMISSED without prejudice, and Plaintiff's pending motions (ECF Nos. 2, 5) are DENIED as moot. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41; see also Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep't, 205 Fed.Appx. 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citing Lopez v. Aransas Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 1978)).
In Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc), the Eleventh Circuit adopted as binding precedent all decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to close of business on September 30, 1981.
IT IS SO ORDERED.