Opinion
Civil Action 6:23cv263
09-29-2023
JAY WILLIAMS, v. BOTIE HILLHOUSE, ET AL.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
K. NICOLE MITCHELL UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Jay Williams, a pre-trial detainee confined in the Henderson County Jail, proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled and numbered civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint was referred for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.
Plaintiff filed his original complaint on May 30, 2023. On June 6, 2023, the Court issued a Deficiency Order (Dkt. #3). Plaintiff was given thirty days from the receipt of the order to submit either the $402.00 filing fee or file a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis and a properly certified in forma pauperis data sheet. Plaintiff was warned that the lawsuit may be dismissed if he did not comply with the order.
The Court has received an acknowledgment from Plaintiff indicating that he received the Deficiency Order on June 26, 2023. (Dkt. #4). Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee or submitted an application to proceed in forma pauperis, or the requisite in forma pauperis data sheet. Plaintiff has not been in contact with the Court. He has not complied with the order of the Court.
A district court may dismiss an action for failure to prosecute or to comply with any order of the court. McCullough v. Lynaugh, 835 F.2d 1126 (5th Cir. 1988); FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). The exercise of the power to dismiss a case for failure to prosecute or obey a court order is committed to the sound discretion of the Court and appellate review is confined solely in whether the Court's discretion was abused. Green v. Forney Eng'g Co., 589 F.2d 243 (5th Cir. 1979); Lopez v. Aransas Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541 (5th Cir. 1978). Not only may a district court dismiss for want of prosecution upon motion of a defendant, but it may also, sua sponte, dismiss an action whenever necessary to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases. Anthony v. Marion Cnty. Gen. Hosp., 617 F.2d 1164 (5th Cir. 1980). Plaintiff has not complied with the Court's order; thus, the lawsuit should be dismissed.
Recommendation
It is therefore recommended that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution and failure to obey an order. FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).
Within fourteen (14) days after receipt of the Magistrate Judge's Report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings and recommendations contained in the Report.
A party's failure to file written objections to the findings, conclusions and recommendations contained in this Report within fourteen days after being served with a copy shall bar that party from de novo review by the district judge of those findings, conclusions and recommendations and, except on grounds of plain error, from appellate review of unobjected-to factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded by statute on other grounds, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days).
So ORDERED and SIGNED.