From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Adams v. Garth

United States District Court, Northern District of Florida
Jan 28, 2022
3:21-cv-2529-MCR-MJF (N.D. Fla. Jan. 28, 2022)

Opinion

3:21-cv-2529-MCR-MJF

01-28-2022

CANDIDA ADAMS, Plaintiff, v. MARY NELL GARTH, et al., Defendants.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Michael J. Frank, United States Magistrate Judge.

This case is before the court on referral from the clerk of the court. On November 17, 2021, the undersigned denied Plaintiff's pro se motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Doc. 4. The undersigned instructed Plaintiff to either pay the filing fee or submit a properly completed motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Id. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply with the order likely would result in dismissal of this case. Id. Plaintiff has not complied with the order and has not responded to the show-cause order issued on December 23, 2021. Doc. 6.

The District Court referred this case to the undersigned to address preliminary matters and to make recommendations regarding dispositive matters. See N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 72.2(C); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), (C); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).

The show-cause order had a 25-day response deadline. The undersigned provided Plaintiff 10 additional days to respond in addition to the show-cause deadline.

Indeed, these orders were returned as “undeliverable.” Docs. 5, 7.

Assuming that her address has changed, Plaintiff's failure to receive and comply with the undersigned's respective orders does not excuse her non-compliance with the court's orders. See Gilbert v. Daniels, 725 Fed.Appx. 789, 792 (11th Cir. 2018).

Based on the foregoing, the undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS that:

1. This case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to comply with orders of this court.

“Federal courts possess an inherent power to dismiss a complaint for failure to comply with a court order.” Foudy v. Indian River Cnty. Sheriff's Office, 845 F.3d 1117, 1126 (11th Cir. 2017) (citations omitted); N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 41.1 (authorizing the court to dismiss an action, or any claim within it, “[i]f a party fails to comply with an applicable rule or a court order”).

2. The clerk of court be directed to close this case file.

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of the report and recommendation. Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court's internal use only and does not control. An objecting party must serve a copy of the objections on all other parties. A party who fails to object to the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations contained in a report and recommendation waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. R. 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.


Summaries of

Adams v. Garth

United States District Court, Northern District of Florida
Jan 28, 2022
3:21-cv-2529-MCR-MJF (N.D. Fla. Jan. 28, 2022)
Case details for

Adams v. Garth

Case Details

Full title:CANDIDA ADAMS, Plaintiff, v. MARY NELL GARTH, et al., Defendants.

Court:United States District Court, Northern District of Florida

Date published: Jan 28, 2022

Citations

3:21-cv-2529-MCR-MJF (N.D. Fla. Jan. 28, 2022)