Opinion
Civil Action 2:22-CV-00153
09-20-2022
STEPHEN M. GOLDEN, Plaintiff, v. JAMES F. GOLDEN, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Jason B. Libby United States Magistrate Judge
Stephen M. Golden is appearing pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil action. He has filed a one-page, six-line complaint attempting to raise claims of “false reporting, libel, slander, defamation and a campaign to steal money” against apparent family members.
The undersigned set a hearing on September 8, 2022 to explain to Plaintiff that his complaint is deficient and is subject to dismissal. (D.E. 5). Plaintiff failed to appear at the hearing. Therefore, the same day, the undersigned entered an order warning Plaintiff that he must appear at all court settings in this case and cautioning him that his case may be dismissed for failure to prosecute or to comply with Court orders. (D.E. 6).
Plaintiff was further cautioned that his complaint is deficient and is subject to being dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) and that his complaint fails to comply with the pleading requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including Rule 8. The undersigned advised Plaintiff why his complaint was deficient, giving Plaintiff an opportunity to amend his complaint and to plead his best case.
Plaintiff was also ordered to show cause on or before September 16, 2022 in a written response to the undersigned's September 8, 2022 Order explaining why his case should not be dismissed for failing to prosecute his claims, specifically addressing why he failed to appear at the hearing before the undersigned. (D.E. 6, Page 2). Plaintiff has failed to comply.
Therefore, the undersigned recommends Plaintiff's case be DISMISSED for failure to prosecute and/or comply with Court orders pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); see also Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (holding district courts have the power to sua sponte dismiss a cause of action for failure to prosecute).
ORDERED
NOTICE TO PARTIES
The Clerk will file this Memorandum and Recommendation and transmit a copy to each party or counsel. Within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy of the Memorandum and Recommendation, a party may file with the Clerk and serve on the United States Magistrate Judge and all parties, written objections, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and Article IV, General Order No. 2002-13, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
A party's failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass 'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).