Clarke v. Maldon, et al. (INMATE 2)

Filing 7

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failures to comply with the orders of this court and to prosecute this action. It is further ORDERED that on or before January 17, 2014, Plaintiff may file an objection to the Recommendation. Signed by Honorable Judge Susan Russ Walker on 1/3/14. (scn, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
NORTHERN DIVISION
JODY GREGORY CLARKE, #233 607, )
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:13-CV-639-WHA
)
[WO]
DARRYL D. MALDON, COI, et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On September 6, 2013, the undersigned directed Plaintiff to forward to the court an
inmate account statement reflecting the average monthly balances and deposits to his prison
account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the filing of this complaint to assist
the court in determining whether he should be allowed to proceed in forma pauperis in this
cause of action. Doc. No. 3. Upon consideration of the account information submitted by
Plaintiff on September 27, 2013, the court directed Plaintiff by order entered October 4,
2013, to provide it with information regarding his inmate account from the institution in
which he was incarcerated prior to being transferred to the Kilby Correctional Facility. Doc.
No. 5. Plaintiff was cautioned that his failure to comply with the October 4 order would result
in a Recommendation that his complaint be dismissed. Id. By order entered November 8,
2013, the court directed Plaintiff to show cause why his case should not be dismissed for his
failure to comply with the October 4, 2013, order regarding the filing of an inmate account
statement from the Ventress Correctional Facility. Doc. No. 6.

The requisite time has passed and Plaintiff has not provided the court with his inmate
account statement from the Ventress Correctional Facility nor has he responded to the court’s
November 8 order to show cause. Consequently, the court concludes that dismissal of this
case is appropriate for Plaintiff’s failures to comply with the orders of the court and to
prosecute this action.
Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this case
be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failures to comply with the orders of this
court and to prosecute this action.
It is further
ORDERED that on or before January 17, 2014, Plaintiff may file an objection to the
Recommendation. Any objection filed must specifically identify the findings in the
Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which Plaintiff objects. Frivolous, conclusive or
general objections will not be considered by the District Court. Plaintiff is advised that this
Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable.
Failure to file a written objection to the proposed findings and recommendations in
the Magistrate Judge's report shall bar a party from a de novo determination by the District
Court of issues covered in the report and shall bar a party from attacking on appeal factual
findings in the report accepted or adopted by the District Court except upon grounds of plain
error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982). See Stein
v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of
Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the

decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on
September 30, 1981.
DONE, this 3rd day of January, 2014.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker
SUSAN RUSS WALKER
CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE