Smith v. Holloway et al, No. 5:2019cv05209 - Document 6 (W.D. Ark. 2019)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER DISMISSING CASE WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on Plaintiff's failure to prosecute the case, his failure to obey the order of the Court, and his failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). Signed by Honorable Timothy L. Brooks on December 5, 2019. (lgd)

Download PDF
Smith v. Holloway et al Doc. 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION MATTHEW SMITH V. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 5:19-CV-05209 SHERIFF SHAWN HOLLOWAY, Benton County, Arkansas; and DEPUTY COBB DEFENDANTS OPINION AND ORDER This is a civil rights action filed by the Plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. Plaintiff is incarcerated in the Benton County Detention Center. By Order (Doc. 3) entered on November 4, 2019, Plaintiff was directed to file an amended complaint. The amended complaint was to be filed by November 30, 2019. Plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the Order “shall” result in the dismissal of the case. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. Plaintiff has not sought an extension of time to comply with the Order. No mail has been returned as undeliverable. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifically contemplate dismissal of a case on the ground that the plaintiff failed to prosecute or failed to comply with an order of the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Line v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (stating that the district court possesses the power to dismiss sua sponte under Rule 41(b)). Pursuant to Rule 41(b), a district court has the power to dismiss an action based on “the plaintiff’s failure to comply with any court order.” Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1986) (emphasis added). Additionally, Rule 5.5(c)(2) of the Local Rules 1 Dockets.Justia.com for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas requires parties appearing pro se to monitor the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 41(b), this case should be and hereby is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute the case, his failure to obey the order of the Court, and his failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). IT IS SO ORDERED on this 5th day of December, 2019. /s/ Timothy L. Brooks_____________________ TIMOTHY L. BROOKS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.