WILLIAMS v. JIMENEZ et al

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
VALDOSTA DIVISION
LUCAS WILLIAMS, 	:
:
Plaintiff, 	:
:
v. 	: 	CASE NO.: 7:26-CV-00002 (WLS)
:
SERGIO JIMENEZ, et al., 	:
:
Defendants. 	:
:
ORDER
Previously, on January 9, 2026, the Court entered an Order (Doc. 3) granting Plaintiff’s
Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2). In conducting a review of Plaintiff’s
complaint, as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), the Court concluded that it lacked sufficient
allegations from which the Court could determine whether Plaintiff’s case is properly filed in
this Court. The Court also concluded that the complaint lacked specific factual allegations to
support Plaintiff’s claims of conspiracy and violation of due process. As such, the Court
ordered Plaintiff to recast his complaint by no later than January 30, 2026. Plaintiff was warned
that failure to comply with the Court’s instructions could result in the dismissal of his case.
When Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s instructions, the Court issued a second Order
(Doc. 4) again instructing Plaintiff to recast his complaint by April 14, 2026. Plaintiff was
warned for a second time that failure to comply with the Court’s order could result in the
dismissal of his case. An entry on the Docket shows that the Court’s second Order (Doc. 4)
was returned to the Clerk as undeliverable. (Doc. 5). Plaintiff has also apparently failed to meet
the requirement that he promptly update his contact information on the Court’s docket.
As of the entry of this Order, Plaintiff has not filed a recast complaint as instructed,
despite the Court’s specific warnings that his failure to do so could result in his case being
dismissed. (See Docs. 3 & 4). Because Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s Orders
or otherwise prosecute his case, his Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep’t, 205 F. App’x 802, 802
Case 7:26-cv-00002-WLS Document 6 Filed 04/16/26 Page 1 of 2

2
(11th Cir. 2006) (“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to
prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citations omitted).
SO ORDERED, this 16th day of April 2026.
/s/ W. Louis Sands
W. LOUIS SANDS, SR. JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 7:26-cv-00002-WLS Document 6 Filed 04/16/26 Page 2 of 2