Opinion
Civil Action No. 2:15cv888-MHT (WO)
01-19-2016
WOODBURCK NOE, # 148475, Petitioner, v. LEON FORNISS, et al., Respondents.
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On December 2, 2015, this court entered an order directing the petitioner to either submit the $5.00 filing fee on or before December 22, 2015, or file by that same date an appropriate affidavit in support of a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis including a prison account statement from the account clerk at Elmore Correctional Facility containing the account clerk's certified statement of the balance in the petitioner's prison account at the time he filed his habeas petition. (Doc. No. 3 at 1.) The petitioner was specifically cautioned that his failure to comply with the court's December 2, 2015, order would result in a recommendation that this case be dismissed. (Id. at 2.)
The requisite time has passed, and the petitioner has failed to submit either the filing fee or an appropriate affidavit (with the account clerk's statement) in support of a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis in compliance with this court's order. Consequently, this court concludes that dismissal of this case is appropriate.
Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice because the petitioner has failed to comply with the orders of this court.
It is further ORDERED that the parties shall file any objections to this Recommendation or before February 2, 2016. A party must specifically identify the factual findings and legal conclusions in the Recommendation to which objection is made; frivolous, conclusive, or general objections will not be considered. Failure to file written objections to the Magistrate Judge's findings and recommendations in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) will bar a party from a de novo determination by the District Court of legal and factual issues covered in the Recommendation and waives the right of the party to challenge on appeal the District Court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5 Cir. 1982); 11th Cir. R. 3-1. See Stein v. Lanning Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11 Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11 Cir. 1981) (en banc).
Done this 19 day of January, 2016.
/s/Charles S. Coody
CHARLES S. COODY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE