Gabaldon v. New Mexico Workforce Connection, No. 1:2018cv00521 - Document 4 (D.N.M. 2018)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER dismissing 1 Complaint by District Judge James O. Browning. (vv)

Download PDF
Gabaldon v. New Mexico Workforce Connection Doc. 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO DAVID A. GABALDON, Plaintiff, vs. No. CIV 18-0521 JB/SCY NEW MEXICO WORKFORCE CONNECTION, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Complaint, filed June 6, 2018 (Doc. 1)(“Complaint”). Plaintiff David A. Gabaldon is pro se. The Honorable Martha Vázquez, United States District Judge, imposed filing restrictions on Gabaldon, stating: “Plaintiff also will be enjoined from initiating further litigation in this Court . . . unless either a licensed attorney who is admitted to practice before this Court signs the pleading or Plaintiff first obtains permission to proceed pro se.” Gabaldon v. Sedillo, No. 17-1106, Order Imposing Filing Restrictions at 2, (D.N.M.), filed February 22, 2018 (Doc. 7)(italics in original). Because Gabaldon did not have a licensed attorney who is admitted to practice before the Court sign the Complaint, and because Gabaldon did not take the required steps to obtain permission to proceed pro se, the Court will dismiss the Complaint, pursuant to rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, without prejudice. See Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)(noting that rule 41(b) permits “courts to dismiss actions sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to prosecute or comply with the rules of civil procedure or court’s orders”). IT IS ORDERED that: (i) the Complaint, filed June 6, 2018 (Doc. 1), is dismissed without prejudice; and (ii) Final Judgment will be entered. Dockets.Justia.com _________________________________ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Parties: David A. Gabaldon Albuquerque, New Mexico Plaintiff pro se -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.