Opinion
Civil Action 00-0159-RV-L.
September 13, 2000.
JUDGMENT
It is ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this action be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice.
ORDER
After due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant to the issue raised, and there having been no objections filed, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. It is ORDERED that this action be and is hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute and to obey the Court's Order.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, an Alabama prison inmate proceeding pro se filed a Petition for Writ of Mandamus together with a Declaration in Support of Request for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis. This action, which has been referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.2(c)(4), is before the Court for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute and to obey the Court's order.
Upon review of Plaintiff's Declaration in Support of Request for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (Doc. 2), the Court denied the Plaintiff's Declaration and instructed the Plaintiff to complete and file this Court's form for a motion to proceed without prepayment of fees by March 30, 2000 (Doc. 3). Plaintiff was warned that his failure to comply with the Court's order within the prescribed time would result in the dismissal without prejudice of this action for failure to prosecute and to obey the Court's order. Plaintiff has not responded in any manner to the Court's order, ndr is there any indication that Plaintiff did not receive a copy of the Court's order.
Due to Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's order, and upon consideration other available alternatives, it is recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to prosecute and to obey the Court's order, as no other lesser sanction will suffice. Link v. Wabash R. R., 370 U.S. 626, 630, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388-89, 8 L.Ed.2d 734, 738 (1962) (interpreting Rule 41(b) not to restrict the court's inherent authority to dismiss sua sponte an action for lack of prosecution); World Thrust Films, Inc. v. International Family Entertainment, Inc., 41 F.3d 1454, 1456-57 (11th Cir. 1995); Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93 (4th Cir. 1989), cert. denied, Ballard v. Volunteers of America, 493 U.S. 1084, 110 S.Ct. 1145, 107 L.Ed.2d 1049 (1990); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989); Goforth v. Owens, 766 F.2d 1533, 1535 (11th Cir. 1985); Jones v. Graham, 709 F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1993). Accord Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32 111 S.Ct. 2123, 115 L.Ed.2d 27 (1991) (ruling that federal courts' inherent power to manage their own proceedings authorized the imposition of attorney's fees and related expenses as a sanction);Malautea v. Suzuki Motor Co., 987 F.2d 1536, 1545-46 (11th Cir. 1993) (finding that the court's inherent power to manage actions before it permitted the imposition of fines), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 863, 114 S.Ct. 181, 126 L.Ed.2d 140 (1993).
The attached sheet contains important information regarding objections to this Report and Recommendation.