From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Crook v. Jones

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
Jan 10, 2017
Case No. 4:16cv717-MW/CAS (N.D. Fla. Jan. 10, 2017)

Opinion

Case No. 4:16cv717-MW/CAS

01-10-2017

RONNY H. CROOK, Plaintiff, v. JULIE L. JONES, Defendant.


REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, initiated this case by submitting a "petition for writ of mandamus for wrongful refusal of accommodations." ECF No. 1. The petition was deemed to be a civil rights complaint brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Plaintiff was required to either file an in forma pauperis motion supported by the required copies of Plaintiff's inmate bank account statement. ECF No. 4. Plaintiff was informed that he must demonstrate his entitlement to proceed with in forma pauperis status by filing copies of his inmate bank account statement for the six month period of time preceding the filing of his complaint. Id. Plaintiff was advised that if he failed to comply with this requirement, a recommendation would be made to dismiss this case. Id.

Plaintiff's deadline to comply with that Order was December 28, 2016. ECF No. 4. As of this date, Plaintiff has not filed any response to the Order, not has he filed the required account information. Thus, this case should be dismissed for failure to comply with a Court Order and for failure to prosecute.

Judicial notice is taken of another recent case initiated by Plaintiff in this Court: case number 4:16cv743-RH/CAS. A Report and Recommendation was entered on January 6, 2017, finding that Plaintiff is barred from proceeding with in forma pauperis status pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). ECF No. 5 of that case. --------

In light of the foregoing, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED for failure to comply with a Court Order and for failure to prosecute.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on January 10, 2017.

S/ Charles A. Stampelos

CHARLES A. STAMPELOS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, a party may serve and file specific written objections to these proposed findings and recommendations. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A copy of the objections shall be served upon all other parties. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the Court's internal use only and does not control. If a party fails to object to the Magistrate Judge's findings or recommendations as to any particular claim or issue contained in this Report and Recommendation, that party waives the right to challenge on appeal the District Court's order based on the unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.


Summaries of

Crook v. Jones

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
Jan 10, 2017
Case No. 4:16cv717-MW/CAS (N.D. Fla. Jan. 10, 2017)
Case details for

Crook v. Jones

Case Details

Full title:RONNY H. CROOK, Plaintiff, v. JULIE L. JONES, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

Date published: Jan 10, 2017

Citations

Case No. 4:16cv717-MW/CAS (N.D. Fla. Jan. 10, 2017)