Lawrence v. Montgomery County Sheriffs Department

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
JUSTIN D LAWRENCE, 	§
§
Plaintiff, 	§
§
VS. 	§ 	CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:25-CV-01206
§
MONTGOMERY COUNTY SHERIFFS 	§
DEPARTMENT, et al. , 	§
§
Defendants. 	§
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Justin D. Lawrence filed this prisoner prose civil rights action while confined in the
Montgomery County Jail. See Doc. No. 1. On July 9, 2025 , the Court ordered the plaintiff
to submit a More Definite Statement to clarify his claims and warned him that the failure
to comply with the order within thirty days could result in the dismissal of this case for
want of prosecution. 	Doc. No. 10. In addition, the Court granted Lawrence's motion for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis, ordering him to pay $25 a month towards the $350
filing fee pursuant to Gay v. Texas Dep 't of Corrections, State Jail Div. , 117 F .3d 240, 242
(5th Cir. 1997). See Doc. 9. 	His first installment was due on or before August 15, 2025 .
Id. at 2.
To date, the plaintiff has neither submitted any installments towards the filing fee
nor a More Definite Statement as ordered. The plaintiffs failure to pursue this action leads
the Court to conclude that he lacks due diligence. 	Therefore, under the inherent powers
1/2
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
December 29, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-01206 Document 11 Filed on 12/23/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

necessarily vested in a district court to manage its own affairs, this Court determines that
dismissal for want of prosecution is appropriate. 	See FED. R. CIV. P. 4l(b); Slack v.
McDaniel, 529 U.S . 473 , 489 (2000) (stating that "[t]he failure to comply with an order of
the court is grounds for dismissal with prejudice" ); Larson v. Scott, 157 F .3d 1030 (5th Cir.
1998) (noting that a district court may sua sponte dismiss an action for failure to prosecute
or to comply with any court order).
The plaintiff is advised, however, that relief from this order may be granted upon a
proper showing in accordance with Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A
proper 	showing 	includes, 	at 	minimum, 	full 	compliance 	with 	the 	Court's 	previous
in structions and orders, including submitting a More Definite Statement and installments
towards the filing fee as ordered.
2 / 2
Accordingly, based on the foregoing, the Court ORDERS as follows :
1. 	This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for want of prosecution.
2. 	This case is CLOSED.
3. 	All pending motions, if any, are DENIED as MOOT.
The Clerk will send this Order to the parties of record.
Signed this 	?-,3 ' ¾ay of December 2025.
ANDREWS. HANEN
UNITED STA TES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 4:25-cv-01206 Document 11 Filed on 12/23/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 2