IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS OSCAR DAVID URRUTIA, Plaintiff, v. CASE NO. 23-3018-JWL SAINT CATHERINE’S HOSPITAL, et al., Defendants. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Plaintiff Oscar David Urrutia is a state prisoner currently housed at the Finney County Jail in Garden City, Kansas. He filed this pro se § 1983 action, alleging that his constitutional rights have been violated. (Doc. 3.) On February 15, 2023, the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 5.) Specifically, the Court explained that it assesse[d] an initial partial filing fee of $13.50, calculated under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(1). Plaintiff is granted to and including March 1, 2023, to submit the fee. Any objections to this order must be filed on or before the date payment is due. The failure to pay the fee as directed may result in the dismissal of this matter without further notice. Id. As of the date of this order, the Court has received no payment from Plaintiff. On February 16, 2023, the Court issued a memorandum and order identifying deficiencies in the complaint that left it subject to dismissal and granting Plaintiff to and including March 22, 2023, to file an amended complaint that cures all the deficiencies. (Doc. 6.) The memorandum and order cautioned Plaintiff that if he “fails to timely file an amended complaint, the Court will proceed on the current complaint, which may be dismissed for the reasons stated herein without further prior notice to Plaintiff.” Id. at 6. Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint.. Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure “authorizes a district court, upon a defendant’s motion, to order the dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or ‘a court order.” Young v. U.S., 316 F. Appx. 764, 771 (10th Cir. 2009) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)). “This rule has been interpreted as permitting district courts to dismiss actions sua sponte when one of these conditions is met.” Id. (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630–31 (1962); Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)). “In addition, it is well established in this circuit that a district court is not obligated to follow any particular procedures when dismissing an action without prejudice under Rule 41(b).” Young, 316 F. Appx. at 771–72 (citations omitted). The time in which Plaintiff was required to submit the initial partial filing fee and an amended complaint has passed without Plaintiff doing so. As a consequence, the Court concludes that this action should be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to comply with a court order. In addition, this action is subject to dismissal in the alternative for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted, for the reasons set forth in the Court’s previous memorandum and order. IT IS THEREFORE BY THE COURT ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated on this 29th day of March, 2023, in Kansas City, Kansas. s/ John W. Lungstrum JOHN W. LUNGSTRUM United States District Judge