Opinion
Civil Action 2:22-CV-00275
12-28-2022
JOSEPH A. STANFORD, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BILL GATES, et al., Defendants.
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
JASON B. LIBBY, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Plaintiff Joseph A. Stanford filed this prisoner civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on or about November 28, 2022. (D.E. 1). Plaintiff's complaint alleged a hodgepodge of allegations and legal arguments that were barely legible and it was not clear as to what claims Plaintiff sought to bring against each individual Defendant, including Bill Gates, Cisco Systems, Pfizer, Inc., Wells Fargo and Microsoft. Therefore, on December 8, 2022, Plaintiff was ordered to submit a More Definite Statement of the facts involved in this action by filing a written response on or before December 23, 2022. (D.E. 9). Plaintiff was cautioned that his complaint was currently deficient and the failure to comply with the Order for More Definite Statement may result in the dismissal of this action under Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure without further notice. (D.E. 9, Page 3).
The Court mailed Plaintiff a copy of the Notice of Reassignment and it was returned as undeliverable on December 9, 2022. (D.E. 10). Upon investigation, Plaintiff provided an incorrect zip code when listing his mailing address in his complaint. Accordingly, Plaintiff's address was updated and the Order for More Definite Statement was mailed again on December 12, 2022. To date, the Order has not been returned as undeliverable. Further, Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Order. Therefore, it is respectfully recommended that Petitioner's case be DISMISSED pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); see also Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997) (holding district courts have the inherent authority to sua sponte dismiss a cause of action for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with any court order).
NOTICE TO PARTIES
The Clerk will file this Memorandum and Recommendation and transmit a copy to each party or counsel. Within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy of the Memorandum and Recommendation, a party may file with the Clerk and serve on the United States Magistrate Judge and all parties, written objections, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(c); Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and Article IV, General Order No. 2002-13, United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
A party's failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations in a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accepted by the District Court. Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).