CLAY v. STIDHAM et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATHENS DIVISION
BYRON DONNELLE CLAY, :
:
Plaintiff, :
:
V. :
: NO. 3:25-cv-00114-TES-AGH
DETENTION DEPUTY :
STIDHAM, et al., :
:
Defendants. :
:
ORDER
Pro se Plaintiff Byron Donnelle Clay, who is currently in the Walton County Jail in
Monroe, Georgia, filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF No. 1. He also moved
for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). ECF No. 2.
Thereafter, the United States Magistrate Judge granted Plaintiff leave to proceed IFP and
ordered him to pay an initial partial filing fee of $53.33. ECF No. 4. The Magistrate Judge
gave Plaintiff fourteen days to pay the fee and cautioned him that his failure to pay may
result in the dismissal of this case. Id.
The time for compliance passed, and Plaintiff did not pay the initial partial filing fee
or otherwise respond to the Court’s order. Therefore, the Magistrate Judge ordered Plaintiff
to show cause why this case should not be dismissed based on his failure to pay the initial
partial filing fee. ECF No. 5. The Magistrate Judge gave Plaintiff another fourteen days to
respond and cautioned him that his failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this case.
Id.
Case 3:25-cv-00114-TES-AGH Document 8 Filed 11/17/25 Page 1 of 2

2
More than fourteen days have passed since the Magistrate Judge entered that order,
and Plaintiff has not paid the initial partial filing fee. In that time, Plaintiff submitted a
letter to the Court asking about the status of several of his cases, ECF No. 6, and a motion
for a “protective transfer/preliminary injunction.” ECF No. 7. Plaintiff listed four cases on
the letter and the motion, but he did not identify this case on either document. See ECF
Nos. 6 & 7. Moreover, neither document addresses Plaintiff’s failure to pay the filing fee
in this case or the show cause order that the Magistrate Judge entered. See id.
Thus, Plaintiff has failed to pay the initial partial filing fee or to respond to the show
cause order. Because Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court’s orders or to otherwise
prosecute this case, the Court now DISMISSES the complaint WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Brown v Tallahassee Police Dep’t, 205 F. App’x 802, 802 (11th
Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (first citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); and then citing Lopez v. Aransas
Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 1978)) (“The [C]ourt may dismiss an
action sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court
order.”).
SO ORDERED, this 17th day of November, 2025.
S/ Tilman E. Self, III
TILMAN E. SELF, III, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Case 3:25-cv-00114-TES-AGH Document 8 Filed 11/17/25 Page 2 of 2