Opinion
Civil Action 1:23-cv-154
11-13-2023
RANDY KELLY v. ZENA STEPHENS, ET AL.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
CHRISTINE L. STETSON, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
Plaintiff Randy Kelly, an inmate confined at the Jefferson County Correctional Facility, proceeding pro se, brings this lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
The above-styled action was referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to the United States Magistrate Judge for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.
Discussion
On October 18, 2023, Plaintiff was ordered to submit an amended pleading that contains a more detailed factual discussion explaining his basis of recovery. Plaintiff's compliance was due on or before the expiration of twenty (20) days from the date of the order.
FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b) authorizes the district court to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with any court order. Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030, 1031 (5th Cir. 1998). “This authority [under Rule 41(b)] flows from the court's inherent power to control its docket and prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases.” Boudwin v. Graystone Ins. Co., 756 F.2d 399, 401 (5th Cir. 1985) (citing Link v. Wabash, R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629 (1962). The exercise of the power to dismiss for failure to prosecute is committed to the sound discretion of the court. See Green v. Forney Eng'g Co., 589 F.2d 243, 245 (5th Cir. 1979).
As of this date, Plaintiff has not submitted an amended pleading as ordered. By failing to respond to the court's order to submit an amended pleading, Plaintiff has failed to diligently prosecute his lawsuit. Accordingly, this case should be dismissed for want of prosecution pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).
Recommendation
The above-styled action should be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution.
Objections
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the magistrate judge's report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C).
Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations contained within this report within fourteen days after service shall bar an aggrieved party from the entitlement of de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court except on grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72.