Hunter v. Stipanuk, 3:15CV00261 BSM. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20160209668
Visitors: 28
Filed: Feb. 08, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 08, 2016
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER , District Judge . On January 4, 2016, plaintiff Stephen Hunter was ordered to respond to defendant's motion for summary judgment on or before February 3, 2016. Hunter was further warned that failure to comply would result in his case being dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). Hunter failed to comply. Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice and defendant's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 20] is denied as moot. It is certifi
Summary: ORDER BRIAN S. MILLER , District Judge . On January 4, 2016, plaintiff Stephen Hunter was ordered to respond to defendant's motion for summary judgment on or before February 3, 2016. Hunter was further warned that failure to comply would result in his case being dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). Hunter failed to comply. Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice and defendant's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 20] is denied as moot. It is certifie..
More
ORDER
BRIAN S. MILLER, District Judge.
On January 4, 2016, plaintiff Stephen Hunter was ordered to respond to defendant's motion for summary judgment on or before February 3, 2016. Hunter was further warned that failure to comply would result in his case being dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). Hunter failed to comply. Accordingly, this case is dismissed without prejudice and defendant's motion for summary judgment [Doc. No. 20] is denied as moot. It is certified that an in forma pauperis appeal would not be taken in good faith. 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
