Gaines v. US Treasury Department et al, No. 5:2021cv00187 - Document 12 (D.S.C. 2021)

Court Description: ORDER AND OPINION DISMISSING CASE: As Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this case and has failed to comply with an Order of this court, the case is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Signed by Honorable J Michelle Childs on 2/19/2021. (prou, )

Download PDF
Gaines v. US Treasury Department et al 5:21-cv-00187-JMC Date Filed 02/19/21 Entry Number 12 Page 1 of 2 Doc. 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ORANGEBURG DIVISION Montavis Kentrail Gaines, ) ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) ) United States Treasury Department and ) Internal Revenue Service, ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) Civil Action No.: 5:21-cv-00187-JMC ORDER AND OPINION Montavis Kentrail Gaines (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this action requesting the court order the Internal Revenue Service to issue him a stimulus payment. (ECF No. 1 at 1-4.) On January 21, 2021, the court directed Plaintiff to bring this case into proper form, explaining how he could do so in the Order. (See ECF No. 6 at 1-3.) Plaintiff was warned that the failure to provide the necessary information by February 11, 2021, may subject the case to dismissal. (Id. at 1.) Despite this warning, Plaintiff did not respond to the court’s Order. As Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this case and has failed to comply with an Order of this court, the case is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 632-33 (1962). IT IS SO ORDERED. United States District Judge February 19, 2021 Columbia, South Carolina 1 Dockets.Justia.com 5:21-cv-00187-JMC Date Filed 02/19/21 Entry Number 12 Page 2 of 2 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within the time period set forth under Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure. 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.