IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 00-20498
Summary Calendar
ROGER LEE DICKERSON,
Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
OFFICER JORDAN, Correctional Officer;
C. PRICE, Major; WARDEN F. FIGUEROA;
BILL LEWIS; GARY L. JOHNSON,
Defendants-Appellees.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. H-98-CV-4324
--------------------
October 31, 2000
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Roger Lee Dickerson, Texas prisoner # 371312, appeals the
district court’s dismissal of his civil rights complaint for
failure to comply with the court’s orders to file copies of his
complaint for service on the defendants and failure to provide
adequate responses to the district court’s order for a more
definite statement. Although the district court dismissed
Dickerson’s suit without prejudice, he is effectively barred from
refiling because of the two-year statute of limitations.
*
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
R. 47.5.4.
No. 00-20498
-2-
See Long v. Simmons, 77 F.3d 878, 879-80 (5th Cir. 1996); Owens
v. Okure, 488 U.S. 235, 249-50 (1989)(the general provision
injury statute of limitations for the forum state is used for 42
U.S.C. § 1983 claims); TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. § 16.003
(2000). The record does not show that Dickerson’s failure was
the result of contumaciousness or an attempt to delay the
proceedings. See Colle v. Brazos County, Tex., 981 F.2d 237, 243
(5th Cir. 1993). The record also does not show that the court
considered lesser sanctions before dismissing Dickerson’s
lawsuit. See Long, 77 F.3d at 880.
The judgment of the district court dismissing Dickerson’s
complaint is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED for further
proceedings. Dickerson is cautioned that this opinion does not
excuse him from compliance with the orders issued by the district
court if the court elects to reinstate those orders upon remand.
Dickerson is further cautioned that a failure to comply with the
district court’s orders in the future may result in dismissal of
his § 1983 lawsuit.
VACATED AND REMANDED.