Opinion
CV622-021
05-03-2023
TREY DALTON DASHER, Plaintiff, v. CORPORAL APRIL TODD, et al., Defendants.
ORDER
CHRISTOPHER L. RAY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
After screening Plaintiff Trey Dalton Dasher's Amended Complaint, the Court directed service of her excessive force claims against defendants Todd, Foreman, Cole, and Chris. See doc. 9 at 5. Defendants moved to dismiss her claims, doc. 17, and to stay the case pending resolution of that Motion, doc. 18. Dasher's deadline to respond to those motions has passed, see S.D. Ga. L. Civ. R. 7.5, and she has not responded, see generally docket. Defendants' Motion to Stay is, therefore, GRANTED as unopposed. Doc. 18. All deadlines in this case are STAYED pending disposition of defendants' Motion to Dismiss, doc. 17. As discussed below, Dasher's failure to respond to the Motion to Dismiss requires her to show cause why her case should not be dismissed for her failure to prosecute.
This Court has the authority to prune cases from its dockets where parties have failed to comply with its Orders. See S.D. Ga. L.R. 41.1(b); see also Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (courts have the inherent authority to dismiss claims for lack of prosecution); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989) (“The district court possesses the inherent power to police its docket.”); Jones v. Graham, 709 F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1983); Floyd v. United States, CV491-277 (S.D. Ga. June 10, 1992).
Accordingly, the Court DIRECTS Dasher to respond to this Order no later than May 10, 2023 and SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be dismissed. To the extent that Dasher wishes to pursue this case, she must respond to defendants' Motion, as well as explain her failure to file her response timely.
SO ORDERED.