Bean v. Castillo, No. 4:2010cv00285 - Document 18 (S.D. Tex. 2010)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. The court ORDERS that this action be dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff's failure to comply with the court's orders. (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified.(jegonzalez, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Bean v. Castillo Doc. 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION JOSEPH BEAN, TDCJ-CID NO. 1141587, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN CASTILLO, Defendant. § § § § § § § § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. H-10-0285 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Pursuant to the plaintiff’s motion, the court reopened this prisoner civil rights action that had previously been dismissed for want of prosecution because the plaintiff failed to comply with the court’s order to submit a more definite statement of the facts on which his complaint is based. In reopening this action, the court again instructed the plaintiff to submit a more definite statement and also instructed him to pay the filing fee or submit an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. More than thirty days later, the court entered an Order to Show Cause why the complaint should not be dismissed because the plaintiff had not submitted any pleading or made any communication with the court. The plaintiff has not responded to the court's Order to Show Cause, entered August 9, 2010, which required the plaintiff to submit within twenty (20) days a more definite statement along with the filing fee or, in the alternative, an application to proceed as Dockets.Justia.com a pauper. The court's order specifically provided that "(f)ailure to comply may result in the dismissal of this action for want of prosecution." The court’s instructions have been clear and explicit, and the plaintiff's failure to pursue this action forces this court to conclude that he lacks due diligence. Although the plaintiff is proceeding pro se, he nevertheless must comply with the rules and the orders of the court. (5th Cir. 1995). See Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 524 The plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s repeated orders warrants dismissal of this action. See Callip v. Harris County Child Welfare Dept., 757 F.2d 1513, 1518-19 (5th Cir. 1985). Therefore, the court ORDERS that this action be dismissed without prejudice due to plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s orders. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997). SIGNED at Houston, Texas on this 30th day of September, 2010. ____________________________ SIM LAKE 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.
