Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Claussen v. Transcoso

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS


March 26, 2010

WILLIAM LYNN CLAUSSEN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
VICTOR TRANSCOSO, ET AL. DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Harold A. Baker United States District Judge

DISMISSAL ORDER

This cause is before the court for case management. The pro se plaintiff filed his complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§1983 against Warden Victor Transcoso from the Illinois River Correctional Center and various unspecified John Doe defendants. On November 9, 2009, the court conducted a merit review and dismissed the plaintiff's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. Section 1915A and violation of Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See November 9, 2009 Merit Review Order.

The plaintiff alleged that he tripped over a hose that was left on the floor and had injured his shoulder. The plaintiff alleged that the defendants were deliberately indifferent to his health and safety, but failed to allege how Defendant Warden Transcosco was responsible for the incident or how the Warden would know about the danger prior to the incident. In addition, the plaintiff had failed to name any other potential defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff was given additional time to file an amended complaint. The plaintiff was advised that he must file his amended complaint on or before December 4, 2009 or his case could be dismissed. The plaintiff had provided the court with his new address, and a copy of the order was sent to this location. However, several months have passed and the plaintiff has failed to respond to the court order. The plaintiff has apparently lost interest in pursuing this litigation.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that:

1) The plaintiff's complaint is dismissed for failure to follow a court order and failure to prosecute with due diligence pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 37(b) and 41(b). This case is dismissed in its entirety without prejudice. All pending motions are denied as moot. [d/e 2]

2) Although the plaintiff's case has been dismissed and he has been released from custody, he is still responsible for full payment of the $350 filing fee.

20100326

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.