Howard v. Mecklenburg Co Jail ( 2023 )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:23-cv-576-FDW TERRELL HOWARD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) MECKLENBRG CO. JAIL, ) ORDER ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) THIS MATTER is before the Court sua sponte. The pro se Plaintiff, a detainee at the Mecklenburg County Jail, filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. [Doc. 1]. He is proceeding in forma pauperis. [Docs. 2, 7]. On October 20, 2023, the Court dismissed the Complaint on initial review. [Doc. 8]. The Court granted the Plaintiff 30 days to file a superseding Amended Complaint. [Id.]. The Plaintiff was cautioned that, “[s]hould Plaintiff fail to timely amend his Complaint in accordance with this Order, the Court will dismiss this action without prejudice.” [Id. at 3-4 (footnote omitted)]. A copy of the Order on initial review was mailed to the Plaintiff at his address of record on the same day it was entered. The Plaintiff has failed to file a superseding Amended Complaint and the time to do so has expired. The Plaintiff appears to have abandoned this action and the Court is unable to proceed. This case will therefore be dismissed without prejudice. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any claim against it.”); Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-33 (1962) (although Rule 41(b) does not expressly provide for sua sponte dismissal, Rule 41(b) does not imply any such restriction and a court has the inherent power to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution or violation of a court order). IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to terminate this action. Signed: December 4, 2023 Frank D. Whitney é United States District Judge Ags