“disobedience of court orders . . . warrants dismissal”
How later courts described this case
- “disobedience of court orders . . . warrants dismissal”
- district courts have “the power to act sua sponte to dismiss a suit for failure to prosecute”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
)
LOBARI BLACKWELL, )
)
Plaintiff, )
)
v. ) No. 1:24-cv-13080-JEK
)
FIREARM LICENSING REVIEW BOARD )
and ATF, )
)
Defendants. )
)
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
KOBICK, J.
On June 2, 2025, the Court conditionally granted plaintiff Lobari Blackwell’s motions for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directed him either to (1) pay the $405 filing fee or (2) file
a renewed motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis by June 23, 2025. ECF 5. The Court
stated this action would be dismissed without prejudice if he did not follow that directive. Id.
In the same order, the Court also dismissed Blackwell’s complaint with leave to file an
amended complaint that states a plausible claim for relief. Id. The Court stated that failure to do
so by June 23, 2025 would result in dismissal of the action without prejudice. Id.
The time for complying with the June 2, 2025 order has lapsed without any response from
Blackwell. Because Blackwell has neither resolved the filing fee nor filed an amended complaint,
this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of prosecution. See Santos v. Dep’t of Educ.
of Com. of Puerto Rico, 108 F. App’x 638, 640 (1st Cir. 2004) (district courts have “the power to
act sua sponte to dismiss a suit for failure to prosecute”); Tower Ventures, Inc. v. City of Westfield,
296 F.3d 43, 46 (1st Cir. 2002) (“disobedience of court orders . . . warrants dismissal”).
SO ORDERED.
/s/ Julia E. Kobick
JULIA E. KOBICK
Dated: June 30, 2025 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE