Moore v. Norris ( 2024 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS MARCUS T. MOORE, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Case No. 24-cv-02142-JPG ) K. NORRIS, ) S. BAREIS, and ) CITY OF SESSER POLICE DEP’T, ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER DISMISSING CASE GILBERT, District Judge: This matter is before the Court for case management. On September 9, 2024, this case was opened upon receipt of Plaintiff Marcus T. Moore’s civil rights complaint against the City of Sesser Police Department and two police officers for alleged violations of Plaintiff’s constitutional rights incident to his arrest a year earlier. (Doc. 1). Plaintiff submitted his Complaint on a standard civil rights complaint form, but he failed to sign it. Id. He also failed to prepay the $405.00 filing fee or file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP motion). On the same date, this Court sent Plaintiff two Orders regarding the action, see Docs. 2 and 3. In one, the Court advised Plaintiff of his obligation to either prepay the filing fee of $405.00 or file an IFP motion and ordered him to do so by October 9, 2024, see Doc. 2. Plaintiff was warned that the action would be dismissed for failure to comply with this Order. Id. In the other, Plaintiff was ordered to sign and return a Notice and Consent / Non-Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form (“Consent/Non-Consent”) by September 30, 2024, see Doc. 3. On September 17, 2024, the Court entered a third Order requiring Plaintiff to file a properly signed Complaint and either prepay the $405.00 filing fee or file an IFP motion by October 9, 2024, see Doc. 4. Plaintiff was again warned that failure to comply with the Order(s) would result in dismissal of this action. Id. He eventually filed a signed Consent / Non-Consent and IFP motion, see Docs. 7, 12. To date, Plaintiff has not filed a signed Complaint. He missed the original deadline for filing it on October 9, 2024, see Doc. 4. He did not request an extension. On October 16, 2024, this Court entered a Notice of Impending Dismissal (Doc. 10) reminding Plaintiff that the case could not proceed to screening under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A without a signed Complaint. Accordingly, the Court advised Plaintiff that this action would be dismissed without prejudice for non-compliance with the Court’s Orders (Docs. 4 and 10), if he did not file a properly signed Complaint by October 30, 2024. This deadline expired a week ago. Plaintiff still did not file a signed Complaint or request an extension of time to do so. The Court will not allow this matter to linger any longer. Disposition The unsigned Complaint (Doc. 1) is STRICKEN, and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to comply with the Court’s Orders (Docs. 4 and 10) to file a signed Complaint and for failure prosecute the claims herein. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). If Plaintiff wishes to appeal this dismissal, his notice of appeal must be filed with this Court within thirty days of the entry of judgment. FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(1)(A). A proper and timely motion filed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) may toll the 30-day appeal deadline. FED. R. APP. P. 4(a)(4). A Rule 59(e) motion must be filed no more than twenty-eight (28) days after the entry of the judgment, and this 28-day deadline cannot be extended. A motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis must set forth the issues Plaintiff plans to present on appeal. See FED. R. APP. P. 24(a)(1)(C). If Plaintiff does choose to appeal, he will be liable for the $605.00 appellate filing fee irrespective of the outcome of the appeal. See FED. R. APP. P. 3(e); 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2); Ammons v. Gerlinger, 547 F.3d 724, 725-26 (7th Cir. 2008); Sloan v. Lesza, 181 F.3d 857, 858-59 (7th Cir. 1999); Lucien v. Jockisch, 133 F.3d 464, 467 (7th Cir. 1998). The Clerk is DIRECTED to CLOSE THIS CASE and enter judgment accordingly. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: November 7, 2024 s/ J. Phil Gilbert J. PHIL GILBERT United States District Judge