Opinion
CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-CV-293-MHT [WO]
07-20-2015
LEON CHAPPELL, A/K/A, WILBUR LEON SMITH, #236 111, Plaintiff, v. JUDGE TRACY S. MCCOOEY, et al., Defendants.
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On June 17, 2015, the court directed Plaintiff to show cause on or before June 29, 2015, why this case should not be dismissed for his failure to forward to the Clerk of Court an initial partial filing fee in the amount of $5.38 as directed by order entered May 4, 2015. See Doc. Nos. 3, 4. The order informed Plaintiff to advise the court whether he authorized prison officials to withdraw the funds from his prison account for payment of the initial partial filing fee, whether he simply had chosen not to submit the filing fee, or whether he was unable to comply at this time with the order directing payment of the initial partial filing fee. Id. Plaintiff was also cautioned that his failure to comply with the June 17 order would result in a Recommendation that his complaint be dismissed. Id.
The requisite time has passed and Plaintiff has not provided the court with the initial partial filing fee nor has he responded to the court's June 17, 2015, order to show cause. Consequently, the court concludes that dismissal of this case is appropriate for Plaintiff's failures to prosecute this action and comply with the orders of the court.
Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failures to prosecute this action and comply with the orders of this court.
It is further
ORDERED that on or before August 3, 2015, Plaintiff may file an objection to the Recommendation. Any objection filed must specifically identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which Plaintiff objects. Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. Plaintiff is advised this Recommendation is not a final order and, therefore, it is not appealable.
Failure to file a written objection to the proposed findings and advisements in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation shall bar a party from a de novo determination by the District Court of issues covered in the Recommendation and shall bar a party from attacking on appeal factual findings in the Recommendation accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon the grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982). See Stein v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on September 30, 1981.
Done this the 20th day of July, 2015.
/s/Charles S. Coody
CHARLES S. COODY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE