# Saldivar v. Drumwright

> District Court, W.D. Arkansas · June 2, 2023

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10632715

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, W.D. Arkansas
- **Decided:** June 2, 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/10632715

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that the district court possesses the power to dismiss sua sponte under Rule 41(b)

## Opinion text

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION

PEDRO SALDIVAR, JR. PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 5:23-cv-05048-TLB-MEF

CORPORAL DRUMWRIGHT,
Washington County Detention Center DEFENDANT

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This is a civil rights action filed by the Plaintiff pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff
proceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1) and
(3), the Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge, referred this case to the
undersigned for the purpose of making a Report and Recommendation. The case is before the
Court on the Plaintiff’s failure to obey the Court’s Orders.
I. DISCUSSION
Plaintiff filed this case on March 31, 2023. An Order (ECF No. 3) was entered advising
Plaintiff that his in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application was deficient as it did not contain a
certificate regarding the funds held in his inmate account. Plaintiff was given until April 21, 2023,
to either pay the $402 filing fee or submit a completed IFP application by providing the certificate
of account. Plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the Order would result in the
summary dismissal of the case.
Plaintiff did not pay the filing fee or file the certificate of account by April 21, 2023. On
May 3, 2023, a Show Cause Order (ECF No. 5) was entered. Plaintiff’s response to the Show
Cause Order was due by May 24, 2023. Plaintiff was advised that failure to comply with the
Show Cause Order “shall” result in the dismissal of the case.
To date, Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, filed the certificate of account, or responded
to the Show Cause Order. He has not requested an extension of time to file his responses. No
mail has been returned as undeliverable. Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s Orders

(ECF Nos. 3 & 5).
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure specifically contemplate dismissal of a case on the
ground that the plaintiff failed to prosecute or failed to comply with an order of the court. Fed.
R. Civ. P. 41(b); Line v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (stating that the district
court possesses the power to dismiss sua sponte under Rule 41(b)). Pursuant to Rule 41(b), a
district court has the power to dismiss an action based on “the plaintiff’s failure to comply with
any court order.” Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1986) (emphasis added).
Additionally, Rule 5.5(c)(2) of the Local Rules for the Eastern and Western Districts of Arkansas
requires parties appearing pro se to monitor the case, and to prosecute or defend the action
diligently.

II. CONCLUSION
For these reasons, it is recommended that, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, the case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE based on Plaintiff’s failure
to prosecute this case, his failure to obey the orders of the Court, and his failure to comply with
Local Rule 5.5(c)(2).
The parties have fourteen (14) days from receipt of the Report and Recommendation
in which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file
timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. The parties
are reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by
the district court.
DATED this 2nd day of June 2023.

/s/
HON. MARK E. FORD
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10632715. Public record. Not legal advice.