Opinion
C. A. 4:22-4291-TLW-TER
01-19-2023
Marvin Bowens Green, #346650, aka Marvin Bowens-Green, #346650, Petitioner, v. Tanya James, Respondent.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Thomas E. Rogers, III United States Magistrate Judge
This is an action seeking habeas corpus relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Petitioner is a state prisoner. This case is before the undersigned due to Petitioner's failure to comply with the undersigned's order to 1) pay the filing fee or complete Form AO24, an application for in forma pauperis status. The order was not returned as undeliverable.
The mail in which the Order was sent to Petitioner's provided address has not been returned to the court, thus it is presumed that Petitioner received the Order, but has neglected to comply with the Order within the time permitted under the Order. The Court has not received a response from Petitioner and the time for compliance has passed. A review of the record indicates that the undersigned specifically informed Petitioner that if Petitioner failed to comply with the Order, this case would be subject to dismissal.
Petitioner's lack of response to the Order indicates an intent to not prosecute this case, and subjects this case to dismissal. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b)(district courts may dismiss an action if a Plaintiff fails to comply with an order of the court); see also Ballard v. Carlson, 882 F.2d 93, 95 (4th Cir. 1989)(dismissal with prejudice appropriate where warning given); Chandler Leasing Corp. v. Lopez, 669 F.2d 919, 920 (4th Cir. 1982)(court may dismiss sua sponte).
Accordingly, it is recommended that this case is dismissed without prejudice. It is recommended that the Clerk of Court close the file.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Petitioner's attention is directed to the important notice on the next page.
Notice of Right to File Objections to Report and Recommendation
The parties are advised that they may file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation with the District Judge. Objections must specifically identify the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which objections are made and the basis for such objections. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must ‘only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.'” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note).
Specific written objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of service of this Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); see Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a), (d). Filing by mail pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5 may be accomplished by mailing objections to:
Robin L. Blume, Clerk
United States District Court
Post Office Box 2317
Florence, South Carolina 29503
Failure to timely file specific written objections to this Report and Recommendation will result in waiver of the right to appeal from a judgment of the District Court based upon such Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985); United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984).