# Eason v. Summit

> District Court, E.D. Missouri · December 11, 2023

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10239633

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. Missouri
- **Decided:** December 11, 2023
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10239633

## Opinion text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION

JAKEEM EASON, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 1:23-cv-00142-CDP
)
UNKNOWN SUMMIT, et al., )
)
Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before me upon review of the file. On or about August 18, 2023, Plaintiff
Jakeem Eason instituted this action by filing a civil complaint and a motion seeking leave to
proceed in forma pauperis. I granted Plaintiff’s motion and assessed an initial partial filing fee,
and reviewed the complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e). As fully explained in my October
17, 2023 Order (ECF No. 7), I determined the complaint was defective and subject to dismissal,
and gave Plaintiff the opportunity to file an amended complaint to cure the defects. In that Order,
I clearly explained why the complaint was subject to dismissal, gave Plaintiff clear instructions
about how to prepare the amended complaint, and cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to timely file
an amended complaint could result in the dismissal of his case without prejudice and without
further notice. I also directed Plaintiff to pay an initial partial filing fee.
Plaintiff had until November 16, 2023 to file an amended complaint. To date, however, he
has neither filed an amended complaint, nor sought additional time to do so. Plaintiff was given
meaningful notice of what was expected, cautioned that his case would be dismissed if he failed
to timely comply, and given additional time to comply. Therefore, this action will be dismissed
without prejudice due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the October 17, 2023 Order and his
failure to prosecute this case. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); see also Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801,
803 (8th Cir. 1986) (“A district court has the power under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) to dismiss an
action for the plaintiff’s failure to comply with any court order[.]”); Dudley v. Miles, 597 F. App’x
392 (8th Cir. 2015).
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate
order of dismissal will be entered herewith.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED than an appeal from this dismissal would not be taken in
good faith.
Dated this 11th day of December, 2023.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10239633. Public record. Not legal advice.