Kridler v. Does
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that 2 Plaintiff's Complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Objections due within 14 days. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jerome T. Kearney on 12/8/2017. (kdr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommended disposition has been sent to United States District Judge
Susan Webber Wright.
Any party may serve and file written objections to this
recommendation. Objections should be specific and should include the factual or legal basis for
the objection. If the objection is to a factual finding, specifically identify that finding and the
evidence that supports your objection. An original and one copy of your objections must be
received in the office of the United States District Court Clerk no later than fourteen (14)
days from the date of the findings and recommendations. The copy will be furnished to the
opposing party. Failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal
questions of fact.
If you are objecting to the recommendation and also desire to submit new, different,
or additional evidence, and to have a hearing for this purpose before the District Judge, you
must, at the same time that you file your written objections, include the following:
Why the record made before the Magistrate Judge is inadequate.
Why the evidence proffered at the hearing before the District Judge (if such a
hearing is granted) was not offered at the hearing before the Magistrate Judge.
The detail of any testimony desired to be introduced at the hearing before the
District Judge in the form of an offer of proof, and a copy, or the original, of any documentary
or other non-testimonial evidence desired to be introduced at the hearing before the District
From this submission, the District Judge will determine the necessity for an additional
evidentiary hearing, either before the Magistrate Judge or before the District Judge.
Mail your objections and “Statement of Necessity” to:
Clerk, United States District Court
Eastern District of Arkansas
600 West Capitol Avenue, Suite A149
Little Rock, AR 72201-3325
Plaintiff Karl Kridler is in custody at the Pulaski County Detention Center. He filed a
pro se 42 U.S.C. ' 1983 action against Defendants and a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis
(Doc. Nos. 1, 2). The Court denied Plaintiff’s In Forma Pauperis Motion because the calculation
sheet Plaintiff submitted was not signed by an authorized official of the incarcerating facility as
required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2) (Doc. No. 4). In a November 7, 2017 Order, Plaintiff was
directed to either submit the $400 statutory filing fee1 or a completed in forma pauperis application,
including a calculation sheet signed by an authorized official, within thirty (30) days. Id. Plaintiff
was notified that if he did not respond within thirty (30) days, his case may be dismissed without
1 Effective May 1, 2013, the civil filing fee increased to $400, due to the implementation of a
$50 administrative fee. This $50 fee does not, however, apply to plaintiffs who are granted in
forma pauperis status.
Plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s November 7, 2017 Order directing him to pay
the filing fee or file a complete in forma pauperis application (Doc. No. 4). Therefore, pursuant to
Local Rule 5.5(c)(2), his Complaint should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to
IT IS, THEREFORE, RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s Complaint be DISMISSED
without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED this 8th day of December, 2017.
JEROME T. KEARNEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) provides, in relevant part:
If any communication from the Court to a pro se plaintiff is not responded to within
thirty (30) days, the case may be dismissed without prejudice. Any party proceeding
pro se shall be expected to be familiar with and follow the Federal Rules of Civil
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?