Howard v. McDonough

Full title: VINCENT HOWARD, Plaintiff, v. JAMES R. McDONOUGH, et al., Defendants

Court: United States District Court, N.D. Florida, Panama City Division

Date published: Apr 10, 2008

Case No. 5:07cv282/RS/MD (N.D. Fla. Apr. 10, 2008)

Opinion

Case No. 5:07cv282/RS/MD.

April 10, 2008

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

MILES DAVIS, Magistrate Judge

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Plaintiff initiated this action on November 27, 2007 by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1). On January 30, 2008 this court entered an order requiring plaintiff to file an amended complaint within thirty days. Plaintiff was warned that failure to comply with the order would result in a recommendation of dismissal of this action. (Doc. 11). Plaintiff did not respond to the order.

Accordingly, on March 17, 2008 this court issued an order directing plaintiff to show cause, within twenty days, why this case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the court. (Doc. 12). Over twenty days has elapsed and plaintiff has not responded to the order either to comply or to explain why compliance is not possible.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this cause be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for plaintiff's failure to comply with an order of the court, and that the clerk be directed to close the file.

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within ten days after being served a copy thereof.Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court's internal use only, and does not control. A copy of objections shall be served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11^th Cir. 1988).