Thompson v. State of South Carolina ( 2023 )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA Reashee Lamar Thompson, #334873, ) C/A No. 4:23-862-JD-TER ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) ORDER State of South Carolina, ) Blake A. Legette, Sgt. Jeffry Cook ) Mackie Hayes, Judge, Monroe Herring, ) ) Defendants. ) ) This is an action filed by a pro se party proceeding in forma pauperis. This case is before the Court due to Plaintiff Reashee Lamar Thompson’s (“Plaintiff”) failure to comply with the magistrate judge’s order dated April 11, 2023, ordering Plaintiff to complete service documents. (DE 13). The Order was mailed to the address provided by Plaintiff, it has not been returned to the Court, and it is presumed that Plaintiff received the Order but has neglected to comply with the Order within the time permitted under the Order. The Court has not received a response from Plaintiff, and the time for compliance has passed. “The court has inherent power to manage its docket in the interests of justice.” Luberda v. Purdue Frederick Corp., No. 4:13-cv-00897, 2013 WL 12157548, at *1 (D.S.C. May 31, 2013). It also has the authority expressly recognized in Rule 41(b) to dismiss actions for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). “The authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution has generally been considered an ‘inherent power,’ governed not by rule or statute but by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630–31 (1962). Plaintiff has failed to respond to the Order within the time ordered. Plaintiffs lack of response indicates an intent to not prosecute this case and subjects this case to dismissal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (district courts may dismiss an action if a Plaintiff fails to comply with an order of the court); see also Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 95 (4th Cir. 1989) (dismissal with prejudice appropriate where warning given); Chandler Leasing Corp. v. Lopez, 669 F.2d 919, 920 (4th Cir. 1982) (court may dismiss sua sponte). Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of Court shall close the file. IT IS SO ORDERED. Chew oxen Josaph Dawson, III United States District Judge Florence, South Carolina May 16, 2023 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.