From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Busby v. Williams

United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division
Dec 11, 2023
Civil Action 1:23-CV-325 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 11, 2023)

Opinion

Civil Action 1:23-CV-325

12-11-2023

JEREMY LADON BUSBY v. BRYAN L. WILLIAMS, ET AL.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CHRISTINE L STETSON UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Jeremy Ladon Busby, a prisoner previously confined at the Stiles Unit of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

The action was referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.

Discussion

On October 30, 2023, Plaintiff was ordered to pay an initial partial filing fee of $21.83 within thirty days of the date of the Order. (Doc. #10.) As of this date, Plaintiff has not paid the initial partial filing fee.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) authorizes the district court to dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to prosecute or to comply with a court order. Griggs v. S.G.E. Mgmt., 905 F.3d 835, 844 (5th Cir. 2018); Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030, 1031 (5th Cir. 1998). “The power to invoke this sanction is necessary in order to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases and to avoid congestion in the calendars of the District Courts.” Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962); Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997).

Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this case diligently because he has not paid the initial partial filing fee. Accordingly, this action should be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution.

Recommendation

This action should be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

Objections

Within fourteen days after receipt of the magistrate judge's report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations contained within this report within fourteen days after service shall bar an aggrieved party from de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court, except on grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72.


Summaries of

Busby v. Williams

United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division
Dec 11, 2023
Civil Action 1:23-CV-325 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 11, 2023)
Case details for

Busby v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:JEREMY LADON BUSBY v. BRYAN L. WILLIAMS, ET AL.

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Texas, Beaumont Division

Date published: Dec 11, 2023

Citations

Civil Action 1:23-CV-325 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 11, 2023)