Carnes v. Bryson, No. 7:2020cv00217 - Document 12 (W.D. Va. 2020)
Court Description: OPINION. Signed by Judge James P. Jones on 6/10/2020. (Opinion mailed to Pro Se Party via US Mail)(tvt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Carnes v. Bryson Doc. 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA ROANOKE DIVISION MARCUS L. CARNES, Plaintiff, Civil Action No. 7:20-cv-00217 OPINION v. S. BRYSON, Defendant(s), By: James P. Jones United States District Judge Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a civil rights complaint, pursuant to 42 Bivens v. Six Unknown Names Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). By order entered April 14, 2020, the court directed plaintiff to submit within 20 days from the date of the order a statement of assets, an inmate account form, and a certified copy of plaintiff’s trust fund account statement for the six-month period immediately preceding the filing of the complaint, obtained from the appropriate prison official of each prison at which plaintiff is or was confined during that six-month period. On April 29, 2020 plaintiff submitted an affidavit regarding his inmate account information which was construed as a motion for extension of time. On May 8, 2020, the court directed plaintiff to submit the required financial information by June 1, 2020. Plaintiff was advised that a failure to comply would result in dismissal of this action without prejudice. More than 20 days have elapsed, and plaintiff has failed to comply with the described conditions. Accordingly, the court dismisses the action without prejudice and strikes the case from the active docket of the court. Plaintiff may refile the claims in a separate action once plaintiff is prepared to comply with the noted conditions. Dockets.Justia.com The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Memorandum Opinion and accompanying Order to plaintiff. ENTER: This 10th _____ day of June, 2020. /s/James P. Jones __________________________________ United States District Judge
]]>
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.
