Opinion
Case No. 4:17cv227-MW/CAS
07-07-2017
GARCIA GONZALEZ ALEXIS, Petitioner, v. CAPTAIN JOHNSON, et al., Respondents.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner, proceeding pro se, initiated this case on May 18, 2017, by submitting a petition for writ of habeas corpus. ECF No. 1. Petitioner did not pay the $5.00 filing fee or submit an in forma pauperis motion at the time of case initiation. An Order was entered on June 2, 2017, directing Petitioner to do one or the other by June 30, 2017. ECF No. 4. The Clerk of Court was directed to provide Petitioner with an in forma pauperis application packet in the event Petitioner was unable to pay the filing fee. Petitioner has neither paid the fee nor filed an in forma pauperis motion.
Additionally, the § 2241 habeas petition was reviewed as a courtesy to Petitioner. The factual allegations of the petition did not challenge a period of indefinite detention while awaiting removal nor did Petitioner specifically request release. ECF No. 1. Rather, Petitioner was complaining about the conditions of his confinement at the jail, alleging acts of retaliation and harassment by several jail officials. Id. The Order explained the two categories of prisoner petitions (those challenging the fact or duration of confinement and those challenging the conditions of confinement) and required Petitioner to explain the type of case he intended to bring. ECF No. 4. Petitioner was given until June 30, 2017, to respond to that Order and file the appropriate pleading. As of this date, nothing further has been received from Petitioner.
Petitioner was advised that if he failed to comply with that Order, a recommendation would be made to dismiss his case. ECF No. 4. It now appears that Petitioner has abandoned this litigation. Accordingly, this case should now be dismissed.
It is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED for failure to comply with a Court Order and for failure to prosecute.
IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on July 7, 2017.
S/ Charles A. Stampelos
CHARLES A. STAMPELOS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
Within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, a party may serve and file specific written objections to these proposed findings and recommendations. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A copy of the objections shall be served upon all other parties. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the Court's internal use only and does not control. If a party fails to object to the Magistrate Judge's findings or recommendations as to any particular claim or issue contained in this Report and Recommendation, that party waives the right to challenge on appeal the District Court's order based on the unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.