Opinion
CASE NO. 1:16-cv-387-MW-GRJ
05-16-2017
BRUCE MAURICE WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. KHRG EMPLOYER, LLC, et al., Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff initiated this case by filing "Notice of Complaint: Theft of Identity." (ECF No. 1.) Plaintiff's complaint and motion for leave to proceed as a pauper were both deficient. (ECF Nos. 1, 2, 4.) The Court then twice ordered Plaintiff to correct these deficiencies or to show cause as to why the case should not be dismissed for failure to comply with a court order and failure to prosecute. (ECF Nos. 4 & 5.) When Plaintiff failed to comply, the Court recommended dismissing the case for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order. (ECF No. 6.)
Following the issuance of that report and recommendation, an amended complaint was then entered on the docket with a filing date that was in compliance with the deadline noted in the order to show cause and prior to the issuance of the report and recommendation, so the Court vacated the report and recommendation. (ECF No. 8.) The amended complaint, however, was still deficient, and Plaintiff again failed to file an amended motion for leave to proceed as a pauper. (See id.)
Plaintiff was ordered to complete the court-approved forms in their entirety, addressing the deficiencies the Court noted in its order. Plaintiff was instructed to file the second amended complaint, together with a service copy for each named defendant, and to file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $400.00 filing fee on or before April 28, 2017. The Court again warned Plaintiff that failure to comply with the order would result in a recommendation that the case should be dismissed without further notice. (ECF No. 8.) As of the date of this report and recommendation, Plaintiff has not complied with the Court order, and has failed to file a second amended complaint or file an amended motion for leave to proceed as a pauper.
Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case should be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with an order of the Court.
IN CHAMBERS this 16th day of May 2017.
/s/_________
GARY R. JONES
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within fourteen (14) 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. If a party fails to object to the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations as to any particular claim or issue contained in a report and recommendation, that party waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on the unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.