Opinion
Civil Action 2:22-CV-00139
11-09-2022
EDWARD BAXTER, Plaintiff, v. CORPUS CHRISTI POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
MITCHEL NEUROCK United States Magistrate Judge
Edward Baxter (“Plaintiff”), proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis (IFP), has filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is currently housed at Corpus Christi Metro Ministries. After granting Plaintiff's IFP application, see Doc. No. 19, the undersigned ordered a more definite statement, which was issued on September 28, 2022. (Doc. No. 20.) The Court imposed a deadline of October 31, 2022 for Plaintiff to respond to the September 28 order, and Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply with the order in a timely manner may result in his case being dismissed for want of prosecution. Id. at 3. To date, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the September 28 order.
The undersigned has thrice warned Plaintiff that his action would be dismissed for want of prosecution if he failed to comply with court orders. See Doc. Nos. 6, 17, 20. A district court may dismiss a case for failure to prosecute or comply with court orders. Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); see also Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (“The district court also has the inherent authority to dismiss an action sua sponte, without motion by a defendant.”) Here, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the undersigned's order to submit a response to the more definite statement to pursue this civil rights action. Therefore, the undersigned recommends that Plaintiff's case be DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
NOTICE
The Clerk will file this Memorandum and Recommendation and transmit a copy to each party or counsel. Within 14 days after being served with a copy of the Memorandum and Recommendation, a party may file with the Clerk and serve on the United States Magistrate Judge and all parties, written objections, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), and General Order No. 2002-13, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
A failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendation in a magistrate judge's report and recommendation within 14 days after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).