Black v. Conway

Full title: MICHAEL ANTHONY BLACK, #219 014, Plaintiff, v. CASANDRA CONWAY, DIRECTOR…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION

Date published: Dec 11, 2015

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-CV-785-MHT [WO] (M.D. Ala. Dec. 11, 2015)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-CV-785-MHT [WO]

12-11-2015

MICHAEL ANTHONY BLACK, #219 014, Plaintiff, v. CASANDRA CONWAY, DIRECTOR OF CLASSIFICATION, et al., Defendants.

SUSAN RUSS WALKER CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On October 27, 2015, the court granted Plaintiff fourteen days to submit a prison account statement from the account clerk at the Bibb Correctional Facility. Doc. No. 3. Plaintiff was cautioned that his failure to comply with the October 27 order would result in a Recommendation that his complaint be dismissed. Id. The requisite time has passed and Plaintiff has not complied with the order of the court. Consequently, the court concludes that dismissal of this case is appropriate for Plaintiff's failures to comply with the order of the court and to prosecute this action.

Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failures to comply with the order of the court and to prosecute this action.

The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to file the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and to serve a copy on Plaintiff. Plaintiff may file any objection to this Recommendation on or before December 28, 2015. Any objection filed must specifically identify the factual findings and legal conclusions in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which Plaintiff objects. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court.

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the Magistrate Judge's report shall bar a party from a de novo determination by the District Court of factual findings and legal issues covered in the report and shall "waive the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions" except upon grounds of plain error if necessary in the interests of justice. 11th Cir. R. 3-1; see Resolution Trust Co. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993); Henley v. Johnson, 885 F.2d 790, 794 (11th Cir. 1989).

DONE, this 11^th day of December, 2015.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE