ORDER

Pro se plaintiff Phillip N. Kerch filed this case asserting multiple 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims. See generally doc. 1; see also doc. 12, doc. 16. The Court granted him leave to proceed in forma pauperis and directed him to complete and return the necessary forms. See generally doc. 4. When he did not return one of the forms, the Court directed him to correct the omission. See doc. 17 at 2-3. He was directed to respond to the Court‘s Order by no later than May 29, 2025. Id. at 3. He did not. See generally docket. The Court also directed him to submit a consolidated Complaint by that date. Id. at 5. He has also failed to comply with that Order. See generally docket.

This Court has the authority to prune cases from its docket where parties have failed to comply with its Orders. See S.D. Ga. L.R. 41.1(b); see also Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (courts have the inherent authority to dismiss claims for lack of prosecution); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989) (“The district court possesses the inherent power to police its docket.“); Jones v. Graham, 709 F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1983); Floyd v. United States, CV491-277 (S.D. Ga. June 10, 1992). Kerch‘s failure to comply with the Court‘s Orders provides a sufficient reason to dismiss his Complaint.

Accordingly, Kerch‘s Complaint, as amended, is DISMISSED for failing to obey a court order and failing to prosecute his case. See, e.g., Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Clerk is DIRECTED to CLOSE this case.

SO ORDERED, this 30th day of June, 2025.

CHRISTOPHER L. RAY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA