Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ared-4_10-cv-00311/USCOURTS-ared-4_10-cv-00311-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Clayton Edwards
Defendant
Carlton Russell
Plaintiff
Spurlock
Defendant

Document Text:

1

 Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) provides that: “It is the duty of any party not represented by counsel

to promptly notify the Clerk and the other parties to the proceedings of any change in his or her

address, to monitor the progress of the case, and to prosecute or defend the action diligently. A party

appearing for himself/herself shall sign his/her pleadings and state his/her address, zip code, and

telephone number. If any communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is not responded to

within thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed without prejudice. Any party proceeding pro se

shall be expected to be familiar with and follow the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.” (Emphasis

added.) 

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

WESTERN DIVISION

CARLTON RUSSELL PLAINTIFF

V. 4:10CV00311 SWW/JTR

 

CLAYTON EDWARDS, Captain; and

SPURLOCK, Lieutenant, White County Jail DEFENDANTS

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, Carlton Russell, who is currently confined in the White County Detention Facility,

has commenced this pro se § 1983 action alleging that Defendants violated his constitutional rights.

See docket entry #1. On May 4, 2010, the Court entered an Order giving Plaintiff thirty days to:

(1) either pay the $350 filing fee in full or file an Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis; and

(2) file an Amended Complaint containing information necessary to complete the screening function

mandated by 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. See docket entry #2. Importantly, the Court advised Plaintiff that

the failure to timely and properly do so would result in the dismissal of his case, without prejudice,

pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).1

 Id. As of the date of this Order of Dismissal, Plaintiff has failed

to comply with the Court’s May 4, 2010 Order, and the time for doing so has expired.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:

Case 4:10-cv-00311-SWW Document 4 Filed 06/10/10 Page 1 of 2
2

1. Pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), this case is DISMISSED, WITHOUT PREJUDICE,

due to Plaintiff’s failure to timely and properly comply with the Court’s May 4, 2010 Order.

2. The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that an in forma pauperis

appeal from this Order of Dismissal and the accompanying Judgment would not be taken in good

faith.

Dated this 10th day of June, 2010.

/s/Susan Webber Wright

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:10-cv-00311-SWW Document 4 Filed 06/10/10 Page 2 of 2