O G\NAl 

Jf n tbe Wniteb ~tates <!Court of jf eberal <!Claims 

CHELSEA L. DA VIS, 

Plaintiff, 

No. 15-598C 

(Filed: July 21, 2015) 

FILED 

JUL 2 1 2015 

U.S. COURT OF 

FEDERAL CLAlMS 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Pro Se; Rule 41(b); Involuntary Dismissal 

v. 

THE UNITED STATES, 

Defendant. ______________ ) 

Chelsea L. Davis, Dallas, Texas, Plaintiff pro se. 

Michael D. Austin, Trial Attorney, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United 

States Department of Justice, Washington, D.C., for Defendant. 

DISMISSAL ORDER 

Pro se plaintiff, Chelsea L. Davis, brought this action asserting state and common law 

claims for conversion and unjust enrichment and seeking unspecified monetary damages, in 

connection with a challenge to the suspension of her law license in the State of Texas. For the 

reasons set forth below, the Court DISMISSES plaintiff's complaint for failure to comply with a 

Court Order. 

On June 16, 2015, plaintiff1 filed this action, asserting state law claims for conversion 

and unjust enrichment against the United States. Compl. at 3. Plaintiff also requests that this 

Court act "sua sponte to expunge and void all matters, actions, and proceedings alleged to have 

been brought against me, under the State Bar Act, Texas rules of disciplinary procedure, Internal 

Procedural Rules of the Board of Disciplinary appeals or other rule ... " Compl. at 8. In 

1 Plaintiff is an attorney who has practiced Jaw in the State of Texas. See generally, Compl. On May 13, 

2015, the Board of Disciplinary Appeals appointed by the Supreme Court of Texas entered a Judgment of 

Indefinite Disability Suspension, suspending plaintiffs law license. See In the Matter of Chelsea L. 

Davis, Case No. 54202, (Board of Disciplinary Appeals, Judgment of Indefinite Disability Suspension, 

filed May 13, 2015). 
addition, plaintiff appears to seek to transfer a criminal matter to this Court and to challenge the 

constitutionality of the Judiciary Act. Compl. at 4, 6-7. 

When plaintiff filed her complaint, she failed to comply with several of the Rules of this 

Court regarding the filing of pleadings. Specifically, plaintiffs complaint has not been properly 

captioned or signed, and the compliant was not accompanied by either the required filing fee or 

an application to proceed without prepayment of fees. Consequently, on June 16, 2015, the 

Court entered an Order instructing plaintiff to cure these defects by July 15, 2015. See Order, 

June 16, 2015. The Court's Order also stated that, should plaintiff fail to cure the defects by that 

date, the Court would dismiss her complaint. Id. 

Rule 41 (b) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC") provides 

in pertinent part that: 

If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these 

rules or a court order, the court may dismiss on its own 

motion .... Unless the dismissal order states otherwise, a 

dismissal under this subdivision (b) .. . operates as an 

adjudication of the merits. 

RCFC 41 (b ). Plaintiff has not corrected the defects in her complaint, nor has plaintiff submitted 

the required filing fee or motion to waive the filing fee, as required by the Court's June 16, 2015 

Order. Because plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court's Order, the Court dismisses her 

complaint pursuant to RCFC 41(b). 

For the foregoing reasons, the Court DISMISSES plaintiffs complaint. 

The Clerk's Office is directed to ENTER final judgment in favor of defendant 

DISMISSING the complaint. No costs. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

2