Sandoval v. John Doe Officer et al, No. 5:2021cv05009 - Document 10 (W.D. Ark. 2021)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER dismissing case without prejudice for failure to prosecute this 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). Signed by Honorable Timothy L. Brooks on April 6, 2021. (tg)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Sandoval v. John Doe Officer et al Doc. 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION JOSE SANDOVAL V. PLAINTIFF CASE NO. 5:21-CV-05009 CORPORAL RAINES and NURSE VELDA 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 seeks leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) (Docs. 2 & 6). Plaintiff is incarcerated in the Washington County Detention Center. By Order (Doc 7) entered on February 2, 2021, Plaintiff was directed to file a complete application to proceed IFP. His prior applications had not contained the certificate of account. When Plaintiff failed to file the complete IFP application, a Show Cause Order (Doc. 9) was entered. The show cause response was due by March 22, 2021. To date, Plaintiff has not filed a complete IFP application. Plaintiff has not sought an extension of time to comply with the Order. Additionally, Plaintiff has not responded to the Show Cause Order or sought an extension of time to do so. 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 [1] Dockets.Justia.com 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 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 Complaint should be and hereby is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this 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 6th day of April, 2021. /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.
