From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jones v. Johnson

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Aug 11, 2004
No. 3:04-CV-0807-H (N.D. Tex. Aug. 11, 2004)

Opinion

No. 3:04-CV-0807-H.

August 11, 2004


FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and an Order of the Court in implementation thereof, subject cause has previously been referred to the United States Magistrate Judge. The findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are as follows:

I. BACKGROUND

In April 2004, plaintiff filed the instant civil action. No process has been issued in this case. On April 26, 2004, the Court issued a Notice of Deficiency and Order wherein it notified plaintiff that he had not properly signed the filed pleading, paid the requisite filing fee, or submitted a request to proceed in forma pauperis. It granted him twenty days to cure the deficiencies and warned him that the failure to do so would result in a recommendation that this action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. To date, plaintiff has filed nothing further in this case. Nor has he paid the requisite filing fee.

II. INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits a court to dismiss sua sponte an action for failure to prosecute or follow orders of the court. McCullough v. Lynaugh, 835 F.2d 1126, 1127 (5th Cir. 1988). This authority flows from a court's inherent power to control its docket, prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases, and avoid congested court calendars. Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-31 (1962). Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Order of April 26, 2004, that he correct the noted deficiencies within twenty days. He has also not paid the filing fee in this action. Such failures indicate that he has no current intention to proceed with this case. Accordingly, the Court should dismiss his complaint.

III. RECOMMENDATION

For the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).


Summaries of

Jones v. Johnson

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division
Aug 11, 2004
No. 3:04-CV-0807-H (N.D. Tex. Aug. 11, 2004)
Case details for

Jones v. Johnson

Case Details

Full title:DANNY L. JONES, ID # 798433, Plaintiff, v. GARY JOHNSON, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division

Date published: Aug 11, 2004

Citations

No. 3:04-CV-0807-H (N.D. Tex. Aug. 11, 2004)