From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cliff v. Singleton

United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division
Jun 14, 2000
Civil Action No. 00-0060-CB-S (S.D. Ala. Jun. 14, 2000)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 00-0060-CB-S.

June 14, 2000.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION


Plaintiff, an Alabama prison inmate proceeding pro se, filed a complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1), together with a Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees (Doc. 2). This action was referred to the undersigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.2(c)(4), and is now before the Court for Plaintiff's failure to pay the filing fee.

Upon review of Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees, the Court found that Plaintiff was required to pay a $5.00 partial filing fee. On April 6, 2000, the Court entered an order that Plaintiff had on three or more occasions, while incarcerated or detained in any facility, brought an action or appeal in a court of the United States that was dismissed on the grounds that it is frivolous, malicious, or fails to state claim upon which relief may be granted, unless the prisoner is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. The Court reconsidered its order granting Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and denied Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees. Plaintiff was ordered by May 5, 2000, to pay the remainder of the $150.00 filing fee (Doc. 5). Plaintiff was warned that his failure to comply with the order within the prescribed time would result in the dismissal of his action. Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, nor has he otherwise responded to the Court's order.

Due to Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's order and to prosecute this action by paying the filing fee, and upon consideration of the alternatives that are available to the Court, it is recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as no other lesser sanction will suffice. Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 630, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (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. Carison, 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. 1983); Jones v. Graham, 709 F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1983). 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.

Done this 14th day of June, 2000.


Summaries of

Cliff v. Singleton

United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division
Jun 14, 2000
Civil Action No. 00-0060-CB-S (S.D. Ala. Jun. 14, 2000)
Case details for

Cliff v. Singleton

Case Details

Full title:STEVE CLIFF, AIS £ 142970, Plaintiff, v. FRANK SINGLETON, et al.…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Alabama, Southern Division

Date published: Jun 14, 2000

Citations

Civil Action No. 00-0060-CB-S (S.D. Ala. Jun. 14, 2000)