Opinion
Case No. 19-cv-00772-JPG
07-07-2020
PRESTIN DWAYNE GREEN, #B89232, Plaintiff, v. HUGHES LOCHARD, DOUGLAS CLARK, MARSHA LILLY, and KELLY LOUCKS, Defendants.
ORDER DISMISSING CASE GILBERT, District Judge :
Plaintiff Prestin Green filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on July 17, 2019, for alleged violations of his constitutional rights at Perry County Jail. (Doc. 1). The Amended Complaint survived screening pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. (Docs. 11 and 14). Plaintiff was allowed to proceed with a single claim against Defendants for inadequate medical care. (Doc. 14).
Plaintiff has since failed to provide the Court with his updated address, and he has taken no other steps to litigate this matter. The Court has received no communication from Plaintiff since he filed his Amended Complaint on October 10, 2019. (Doc. 11). Several court documents that were mailed to Plaintiff have been returned undeliverable. (See Docs. 35-41).
Plaintiff was repeatedly warned of his obligation to notify the Court and parties of any address change within seven (7) days of a relocation. (See Docs. 3, 9, 13, 38, and 40). On April 29, 2020 and June 17, 2020, this Court entered Orders to Show Cause. (Docs. 38 and 40). Pursuant to both, Plaintiff was required to demonstrate why this case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with the orders to update his address and for failure to prosecute his claim against the defendants. (Id.). Plaintiff failed to respond to the show cause orders. Both orders were returned to the Court undelivered. (Docs. 39 and 41). A week has passed since Plaintiff's final response deadline expired, and the Court has received no communication from him.
The Court will not allow this matter to linger indefinitely. This action shall be dismissed with prejudice based on Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's Orders to update his address (Docs. 3, 9, and 13), his failure to respond to the Orders to Show Cause (Docs. 38 and 40), and his failure to prosecute his claim against Defendants. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b); Lucien v. Brewer, 9 F.3d 26, 28 (7th Cir. 1993) (stating dismissal is a "feeble sanction" if it is without prejudice; "Rule 41(b) states the general principle that failure to prosecute a case should be punished by dismissal of the case with prejudice.").
Disposition
IT IS ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice, based on Plaintiff's failure to comply with multiple Court Orders (Docs. 3, 9, 13, 38, and 40) and his failure to prosecute his claim(s) herein. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). The dismissal of this action does not count as a "strike" under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g).
IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's obligation to pay the filing fee for this action was incurred at the time the action was filed, regardless of subsequent developments in the case. Accordingly, the filing fee of $350.00 remains due and payable. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1); Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998).
The Clerk's Office is DIRECTED to close this case and enter judgment accordingly.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED: July 7, 2020
s/J. Phil Gilbert
J. PHIL GILBERT
United States District Judge