-JMR Batista-Espinal v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security et al, No. 5:2010cv00172 - Document 12 (S.D. Miss. 2011)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. This case is dismissed for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the orders of the Court. Signed by Honorable David C. Bramlette, III on May 11, 2011. (lda)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI WESTERN DIVISION ALDRI D. BATISTA-ESPINAL, #64821-053 VERSUS PLAINTIFF CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:10-cv-172-DCB-JMR U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, et al. DEFENDANTS MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, an inmate of the Bureau of Prisons, filed on November 5, 2010, a petition for a writ of mandamus and a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.1 On February 22, 2011, this Court entered an Order [9] directing Plaintiff to file a written response to provide specific information regarding his claims, on or before March 15, 2011. Plaintiff was warned that failure to keep this Court informed of his current address or failure to timely comply with any Order of this Court may lead to the dismissal of his case. Plaintiff failed to comply with this Order. On March 31, 2011, an Order [10] was entered directing Plaintiff to show cause, on or before April 14, 2011, why this case should not be dismissed for his failure to comply with the Court's Order of February 22, 2011. In addition, Plaintiff was directed to comply with the Order of February 22, 2011, by filing his written response on or before April 14, 2011. The Show Cause Order [10] warned Plaintiff that failure to keep this Court informed of his current address or failure to timely comply with the requirements of the Order would lead to the dismissal of this case, without further notice. On April 11, 2011, the envelope [11] 1 Plaintiff was granted in forma pauperis status on February 10, 2011. containing the Show Cause Order [10] was returned by the postal service with the notation Areturn to sender, refused, unable to forward.@ In addition there is a return to sender notation on the envelope which appears to be from the Adams County Correctional Center that states Areleased, not at this facility.@ Needless to say, Plaintiff failed to comply with the Show Cause Order. Plaintiff has failed to comply with two Court orders, failed to keep this Court informed of his current address and he has not contacted this Court since January 25, 2011. This Court has the authority to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and under its inherent authority to dismiss the action sua sponte. See generally, Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626 (1962); Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030 (5th Cir.1998); McCullough v. Lynaugh, 835 F.2d 1126 (5th Cir. 1988). The Court must be able to clear its calendars of cases that remain dormant because of the inaction or dilatoriness of the parties seeking relief, so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases. Link, 370 U.S. at 630. Such a Asanction is necessary in order to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases and to avoid congestion in the calendars@ of the Court. Id. at 629-30. The Court concludes that dismissal of this action for Plaintiff=s failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the orders of the Court under Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is proper. See Rice v. Doe, 306 F. App=x 144 (5th Cir. 2009). Since the Defendants have not been called on to respond to Plaintiff's pleading, and the Court has not considered the merits of Plaintiff's claims, the Court's order of dismissal is without prejudice. See Munday/Elkins Auto. Partners, Ltd. v. Smith, 201 F. App=x 265, 267 (5th Cir. 2006). A Final Judgment in accordance with this Memorandum Opinion will be entered. 2 THIS the 11th day of May , 2011. s/David Bramlette UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Memorandum Opinion 5:10cv172-DCB-JMR 3

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.