Opinion
Civil Action 1:22-cv-307
11-03-2022
ROBERT D. HINSON v. SHERIFF, JEFFERSON COUNTY
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
ZACK HAWTHORN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Petitioner Robert D. Hinson, an inmate confined at the Jefferson County Correctional Facility, proceeding pro se, brings this Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241.
The above-styled action was referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Local Rules for the Assignment of Duties to the United States Magistrate Judge for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.
Discussion
On September 29, 2022, Petitioner's Application to Proceed In Forma Pauperis was denied, and Petitioner was ordered to pay the $5.00 filing fee. Petitioner's compliance with the order was due on or before the expiration of thirty (30) days from the date of the order.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) authorizes the district court to dismiss an action for failure to prosecute or for failure to comply with any court order. Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030, 1031 (5th Cir. 1998). “This authority [under Rule 41(b)] 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, 629 (1962)).
As of this date, Petitioner has failed to pay the $5.00 filing as ordered. Accordingly, Petitioner has failed to diligently prosecute this case. Therefore, this action should be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).
Recommendation
This action should be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b).
Objections
Within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the magistrate judge's report, any party may serve and file written objections to the findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C).
Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations contained within this report within fourteen days after service shall bar an aggrieved party from the entitlement of de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the district court except on grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R. CIV. P. 72.