Ross v. Campanelli et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
KELLY ROSS,
Plaintiff,
v. No. 1:26-cv-00894-MIS-KRS
JOY CAMPANELLI,
GENINE D. EDWARDS and
BRIAN GOTTLIEB,
Defendants.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on pro se Plaintiff Kelly Ross’s Complaint, ECF
No. 1, filed March 19, 2026, and Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without
Prepaying Fees or Costs (Short Form), ECF No. 2, filed March 19, 2026 (“Short Form
Application”).
The only allegations in the Complaint state:
1. Defendants had ex parte communication,
2. This case is within federal jurisdiction,
3. Plaintiff demands damages to be decided by the Court.
Compl. at 1.
On March 25, 2026, United States Magistrate Judge Kevin R. Sweazea issued an Order
notifying Plaintiff that the Complaint failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and
ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint. See Order at 2, 4, ECF No. 3 (notifying Plaintiff
that failure to timely file an amended complaint may result in dismissal of this case). Plaintiff did
not file an amended complaint by the April 15, 2026, deadline.
Case 1:26-cv-00894-MIS-KRS Document 5 Filed 04/20/26 Page 1 of 3

2
Plaintiff also filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis using a Short Form Application.
ECF No. 2. Judge Sweazea notified Plaintiff the Short Form Application does not provide
sufficient information for the Court to determine whether a plaintiff is unable to pay the required
fees and ordered Plaintiff to file an Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying
Fees or Costs (Long Form). See Order at 1, 4 (notifying Plaintiff that failure to timely file a Long
Form Application may result in denial of the motion to proceed in forma pauperis). Plaintiff did
not file a Long Form Application by the April 15, 2026, deadline.
The Court dismisses this case without prejudice because Plaintiff has not complied with
Judge Sweazea’s Order to file an amended complaint and to file a Long Form Application to
proceed in forma pauperis. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (“If the plaintiff fails to prosecute or to
comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action”); Gustafson
v. Luke, 696 F. App’x 352, 354 (10th Cir. 2017) (“Although the language of Rule 41(b) requires
that the defendant file a motion to dismiss, the Rule has long been interpreted to permit courts to
dismiss actions sua sponte for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute or comply with the rules of civil
procedure or court's orders.”) (quoting Olsen v. Mapes, 333 F.3d 1199, 1204 n.3 (10th Cir. 2003)).
Because it is dismissing this case and based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with Judge Sweazea’s
Order to file a Long Form Application, the Court denies Plaintiff’s Short Form Application to
proceed in forma pauperis.
IT IS ORDERED that:
(i) This case is DISMISSED without prejudice; and
Case 1:26-cv-00894-MIS-KRS Document 5 Filed 04/20/26 Page 2 of 3

3
(ii) Plaintiff’s Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs
(Short Form), ECF No. 2, filed March 19, 2026, is DENIED.
………………………………………….
MARGARET STRICKLAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 1:26-cv-00894-MIS-KRS Document 5 Filed 04/20/26 Page 3 of 3