From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

McGee v. Rule

United States District Court, District of Kansas
Oct 31, 2022
No. 22-3212-JWL-JPO (D. Kan. Oct. 31, 2022)

Opinion

22-3212-JWL-JPO

10-31-2022

ANTONIO ALEXANDER MCGEE, Plaintiff, v. FNU RULE, Defendant.


ORDER

JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

Plaintiff, Antonio Alexander McGee, brings this pro se civil rights case. Plaintiff is incarcerated at the Lansing Correctional Facility in Lansing, Kansas. The Court entered a Memorandum and Order (Doc. 2) 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. (Doc. 2, at 1.) The Court also granted Plaintiff until October 27, 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.” Id. at 2. On October 11, 2022, Plaintiff submitted a response (Doc. 3). The Court reviewed the response and entered an Order (Doc. 4) finding no ground to conclude that Plaintiff is entitled to proceed in forma pauperis, and cautioning Plaintiff that he remains obligated to pay the filing fee by the October 27, 2022 deadline. Plaintiff has failed to pay the filing fee by the deadline set forth in the orders.

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).

The time in which Plaintiff was required to submit the filing fee has passed. 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

McGee v. Rule

United States District Court, District of Kansas
Oct 31, 2022
No. 22-3212-JWL-JPO (D. Kan. Oct. 31, 2022)
Case details for

McGee v. Rule

Case Details

Full title:ANTONIO ALEXANDER MCGEE, Plaintiff, v. FNU RULE, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, District of Kansas

Date published: Oct 31, 2022

Citations

No. 22-3212-JWL-JPO (D. Kan. Oct. 31, 2022)