McCall v. USA

Filing 12

RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION recommending that the District Court dismiss 1 Plaintiff's Complaint wihtout prejudice, under Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), for failure to comply with the Court's Order of 3/17/09 and the Order of 6/9/09. Objections to R&R due by 10/7/2009. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth Deere on 9/23/09. (hph)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT E A S T E R N DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS E A S T E R N DIVISION B O N D A R Y MCCALL, R e g . # 43827-019 V. C A S E NO. 2:09cv00023-SWW-BD DEFENDANTS

P L A IN T IF F

U N I T E D STATES OF AMERICA, et al.

R E C O M M E N D E D DISPOSITION I. P r o c e d u r e for Filing Objections: T h e following Recommended Disposition has been sent to United States District J u d g e Susan Webber Wright. Any party may serve and file written objections to this re c o m m e n d a tio n . Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal b a s is for the objection. If the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that f in d in g and the evidence that supports your objection. An original and one copy of your o b je c tio n s must be received in the office of the United States District Court Clerk no later th a n eleven (11) days from the date you receive the Recommended Disposition. A copy w ill be furnished to the opposing party. Failure to file timely objections may result in w a iv e r of the right to appeal questions of fact. M a il your objections and "Statement of Necessity" to: C le rk , United States District Court E a s te rn District of Arkansas 6 0 0 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149 L ittle Rock, AR 72201-3325

II.

B ackground: On February 26, 2009, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit pro se under 42 U.S.C. § 1983

(d o c k e t entry #1). Plaintiff did not move to proceed in forma pauperis, nor did he pay the $ 3 5 0 .0 0 filing fee to initiate this action with the Court. On March 17, 2009, the Court issued an Order (#2) directing Plaintiff to file a c o m p le te application to proceed in forma pauperis, or pay the $350.00 filing fee, within th irty days of entry of the order. Plaintiff was further ordered to file an Amended C o m p la in t identifying and naming as Defendants the individuals who acted u n c o n stitu tio n a lly and stating any injury he suffered based on the alleged constitutional v io la tio n s . Plaintiff failed to file a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis or pay th e $350.00 filing fee, and further failed to file an Amended Complaint in the time a llo w e d . Thus, a Recommended Disposition was entered by this Court (#4) for dismissal o f Plaintiff's Complaint without prejudice under Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) for failure to c o m p ly with the Court's Order of March 17, 2009. On May 26, 2009, Plaintiff filed an Objection (#6) to the Recommended D is p o s itio n and filed an Amended Complaint (#8) on June 1, 2009. However, an a p p lic a tio n to proceed in forma pauperis still was not submitted, nor was the $350.00 f ilin g fee paid.

2

By Order of June 9, 2009 (#9), Judge Susan Webber Wright directed Plaintiff to s u b m it the $350.00 filing fee or a properly completed in forma pauperis application w ith in 30 days. Plaintiff has failed to comply with that court order. Plaintiff was previously notified that failure to timely comply with court orders c o u ld result in dismissal of his case. Further, it appears Plaintiff also has failed to notify th e Court of his new address, as is evidenced by mail returned to the Court (#11) on June 2 3 , 2009. III. C o n c lu s io n : T h e Court recommends that the District Court dismiss Plaintiff's Amended C o m p la in t without prejudice, under Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), for failure to comply with the C o u rt's Order of March 17, 2009 and the Order of June 9, 2009. DATED this 23rd day of September, 2009.

____________________________________ U N IT E D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3