From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Henry v. Capital One Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Jan 2, 2018
CIVIL CASE NO. 3:17-CV-2962-M-BK (N.D. Tex. Jan. 2, 2018)

Opinion

CIVIL CASE NO. 3:17-CV-2962-M-BK

01-02-2018

RAY HENRY, Plaintiff, v. CAPITAL ONE BANK, et al., Defendants.


FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Special Order 3, this case was referred to the United States magistrate judge for pretrial management. For the reasons that follow, this action should be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for want of prosecution.

I. BACKGROUND

On October 30, 2017, the Court ordered Plaintiff (1) to pay the $400.00 filing fee or (2) to submit a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on the AO-239 Form. The deadline for Plaintiff's response was November 21, 2017. As of the date of this recommendation, however, Plaintiff has not responded to the Court's order or paid the filing fee, nor has he sought an extension of time to do so.

II. ANALYSIS

Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits a court to dismiss an action sua sponte for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with the federal rules or any court order. Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030, 1031 (5th Cir. 1998). "This authority flows from the court's inherent power to control its docket and prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases." Boudwin v. Graystone Ins. Co., Ltd., 756 F.2d 399, 401 (5th Cir. 1985) (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626 (1962)).

Plaintiff has been given ample opportunity to respond to the Court's order. He has impliedly refused or declined to do so. Therefore, this action should be dismissed without prejudice for lack of prosecution. See FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b) (an involuntary dismissal "operates as an adjudication on the merits," unless otherwise specified).

III. RECOMMENDATION

For the foregoing reasons, it is recommended that this action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for want of prosecution.

SIGNED January 2, 2018.

/s/_________

RENÉE HARRIS TOLIVER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

INSTRUCTIONS FOR SERVICE AND

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL/OBJECT

A copy of this report and recommendation will be served on all parties in the manner provided by law. Any party who objects to any part of this report and recommendation must file specific written objections within 14 days after being served with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). In order to be specific, an objection must identify the specific finding or recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for the objection, and specify the place in the magistrate judge's report and recommendation where the disputed determination is found. An objection that merely incorporates by reference or refers to the briefing before the magistrate judge is not specific. Failure to file specific written objections will bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge that are accepted or adopted by the district court, except upon grounds of plain error. See Douglass v. United Services Automobile Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), modified by statute on other grounds, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days).

/s/_________

RENÉE HARRIS TOLIVER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Henry v. Capital One Bank

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Jan 2, 2018
CIVIL CASE NO. 3:17-CV-2962-M-BK (N.D. Tex. Jan. 2, 2018)
Case details for

Henry v. Capital One Bank

Case Details

Full title:RAY HENRY, Plaintiff, v. CAPITAL ONE BANK, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Date published: Jan 2, 2018

Citations

CIVIL CASE NO. 3:17-CV-2962-M-BK (N.D. Tex. Jan. 2, 2018)