ORDER
WILLIAM H. STEELE, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court sua sponte.
Plaintiff, Dollye L. Jackson, proceeding pro se, filed the Complaint (doc. 1) on April 10, 2009, against defendant, Vaughan Regional Medical Center. The two-page Complaint included statements that Jackson "would like to file a lawsuit of Race Discrimination," but presented no facts in support of such a claim. At best, the Complaint recited allegations that certain of Jackson's co-workers had been fired for reasons that she considered retaliatory, that her white supervisor had been fired after completing a disciplinary report for her, that a colleague had stated that her department would be "all white," and that the EEOC had reassigned her administrative charge to a different investigator. Nowhere did the Complaint identify any adverse employment action taken against Jackson, much less any factual basis to support a plausible claim that such adverse employment action was taken because of her race.
Defendant promptly challenged the sufficiency of Jackson's pleading under the requisite standards of Rule 8, Fed.R.Civ.P., as construed in Ashcroft v. Iqbal, ___ U.S. ___, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). Upon review of defendant's motion to dismiss, the Court concluded via Order (doc. 24) dated October 6, 2009, that Jackson's Complaint fell far short of the applicable Rule 8 pleading requirements, and that it did not satisfy the Iqbal directive that it contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face. Notwithstanding this determination, in deference to Jackson's pro se status, the Court did not dismiss her Complaint outright, but instead sua sponte authorized her to remedy these deficiencies by filing an Amended Complaint that comports with minimum pleading standards. In that regard, the October 6 Order provided that "Jackson is
The law is clear in this Circuit that "[a] district court need not tolerate defiance of reasonable orders." Equity Lifestyle Properties, Inc. v. Florida Mowing and Landscape Service, Inc., 556 F.3d 1232, 1240 (11
Notwithstanding the availability of such a sanction in every district court's arsenal, the Eleventh Circuit has held that dismissal of an action for failure to prosecute should be undertaken "only in the face of a clear record of delay or contumacious conduct by the plaintiff." McKelvey v. AT & T Technologies, Inc., 789 F.2d 1518, 1520 (11
Despite the Court's specific instructions to Jackson that it was imperative that she correct her defective pleading by a date certain, and despite the Court's twice-repeated admonition that failure to do so would result in the dismissal of their Complaint, plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. Indeed, she has not responded to the October 6 Order in any form or fashion. Under the circumstances, the Court finds that lesser sanctions will not suffice, and is left with no reasonable alternative but to dismiss this action for failure to comply with minimum pleading requirements, for failure to prosecute, and for failure to abide by the orders of this Court. Accordingly, this action is hereby
DONE and ORDERED.
Comment
User Comments