Opinion
3:24-CV-232-MMH-LLL
09-19-2024
RICKY HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL, Defendants.
Ricky Harris, pro se plaintiff
Ricky Harris, pro se plaintiff
The Honorable Marcia Morales Howard, United States District Judge
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
LAURA LOTHMAN LAMBERT, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE.
This cause is before the Court sua sponte. Plaintiff initiated this action by filing a complaint on March 5, 2024, doc. 1. On the same date, plaintiff filed an Application to Proceed in District Court Without Prepaying Fees or Costs (Long Form), doc. 2, which the Court construed as a motion to proceed in forma pauperis. On June 28, 2024, the Court entered an Order, doc. 3, denying without prejudice plaintiff's motion, doc. 2. The Court ordered plaintiff on or before August 1, 2024, to “either submit an amended complaint that sets forth the factual bases for his claims and submit a renewed application to proceed without prepayment of fees or costs; or pay the filing fee.” Doc. 3 at 6. The Court cautioned plaintiff that failure to do so “may result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed.” Id. at 7. Plaintiff failed to respond to the Order.
As a result, the Court entered an Order to Show Cause on August 6, 2024. Doc. 4. In it, the Court ordered plaintiff, on or before August 23, 2024, to either “(1) submit an amended complaint, correcting the deficiencies identified in the Court's Order, doc. 3, and submit a renewed application to proceed without prepayment of fees or costs; or (2) pay the appropriate filing fee.” Id. Additionally, the plaintiff was ordered to show cause in writing why he failed to comply with this Court's previous Order. Id. Plaintiff was also warned that “failure to comply with this Order will likely result in a recommendation that plaintiff's case be dismissed without further notice.” Id. To date, plaintiff has not responded to the Order to Show Cause.
Local Rule 3.10 provides that “if [a] plaintiff fails to demonstrate due diligence and just cause for delay” when responding to an order to show cause, “[a] plaintiff's failure to prosecute diligently can result in dismissal.” I find that plaintiff has failed to demonstrate due diligence and just cause for delay in response to the Court's June 28, 2024 Order, doc. 3, as well as the subsequent Order to Show Cause, doc. 4.
I respectfully recommend:
1. This case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 3.10, Local Rules, United States District Court, Middle District of Florida; and
2. the Clerk be directed to terminate all pending motions and close the file.
Notice
“Within 14 days after being served with a copy of [a report and recommendation on a dispositive issue], a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2). “A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being served with a copy.” Id. A party's failure to serve and file specific objections to the proposed findings and recommendations alters the scope of review by the District Judge and the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, including waiver of the right to challenge anything to which no specific objection was made. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); 11th Cir. R. 3-1; Order (Doc. No. 3), No. 8:20-mc-100-SDM, entered October 29, 2020, at 6.