Carter v. Covington County Jail et al (INMATE 2)

Filing 4

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failures to comply with the orders of this court and to prosecute this action; Objections to R&R due by 10/7/2008. Signed by Honorable Terry F. Moorer on 9/24/2008. (cc, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F O R THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA N O R T H E R N DIVISION __________________________________ C A L V IN CARTER Plaintiff, v. C O V IN G T O N COUNTY JAIL, et al., * * * 2:08-CV-701-TMH (WO) *

D e f e n d a n ts . * __________________________________ RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE O n August 28, 2008 the court granted Plaintiff fourteen days to file with the Clerk e ith e r the $350.00 filing fee or a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis

a c c o m p a n ie d by an affidavit in support thereof. (Doc. No. 3.) Plaintiff was cautioned that h is failure to comply with the August 28 order would result in a Recommendation that his c o m p la in t be dismissed. (Id.) The requisite time has passed and Plaintiff has not provided t h e court with either the filing fee or a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. C o n seq u en tly, the court concludes that dismissal of this case is appropriate for Plaintiff's f a ilu re s to comply with the orders of the court and to prosecute this action. A c c o r d in g ly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case b e DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failures to comply with the orders of this c o u rt and to prosecute this action. It is further O R D E R E D that the parties are DIRECTED to file any objections to the

R e c o m m e n d a tio n on or before October 7, 2008. Any objections filed must specifically id e n tif y the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which a party objects. F r iv o lo u s , conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The p a rtie s are advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable. F a ilu re to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the M a g is tra te Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District C o u rt of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual f in d in g s in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain e rr o r or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5 th Cir. 1982). See Stein v . Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11 th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of P r ic h a r d , 661 F.2d 1206 (11 th Cir. 1981, en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the d e c i s io n s of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on S e p te m b e r 30, 1981. D o n e , this 24 th day of September 2008.

/s/Terry F. Moorer TERRY F. MOORER U N IT E D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

-2-