IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
April 20, 2006
KEITH STENNIS, PETITIONER,
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, RESPONDENT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Stiehl, District Judge
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This action was opened solely upon receipt of Petitioner's "motion for extension of time" (Doc. 1), which the Clerk construed as a habeas corpus petition. The Court granted Petitioner's request for additional time to file his habeas petition; the Court also directed him to pay the $5 filing fee or file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 3). Those pleadings were due by March 10, 2006, but that deadline has long since elapsed without any communication of any sort from Petitioner, even though he was advised that failure to respond to that order would be grounds for dismissal of this action. FED.R.CIV.P. 41(b); see generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to comply with an order of this Court. FED.R.CIV.P. 41(b); see generally Ladien v. Astrachan, 128 F.3d 1051 (7th Cir. 1997); Johnson v. Kamminga, 34 F.3d 466 (7th Cir. 1994).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
WILLIAM D. STIEHL
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.