MARTS ET AL v. MCNESBY ET AL
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that Plaintiff TERENCE THOMPSON be terminated as a Plaintiff in this cause of action, and further, that Plaintiff Terence Thompson's case be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to c omply with an order of the court. That the clerk be directed to change the docket to reflect that Plaintiff Terence Thompson is terminated as a Plaintiff in this cause of action. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE ELIZABETH M TIMOTHY on 12/2/08. Internal deadline for referral to district judge if objections are not filed earlier: 12/30/2008 (lcu)
Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION CHRISTOPHER BANKS, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. RON McNESBY, et al., Defendants. __________________________________/ REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Plaintiff SIDNEY MARTS commenced this action by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1). Plaintiff TERENCE THOMPSON joined this cause of action on August 19, 2008, and was given thirty (30) days in which to pay the filing fee or submit a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 20). Plaintiff failed to respond to the order; therefore, on October 27, 2008, the court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to show cause, within twenty (20) days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the court (Doc. 58). The time for compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed with no response from Plaintiff. Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED: 1. That Plaintiff Terence Thompson be terminated as a Plaintiff in this cause of action, and further, that Plaintiff Terence Thompson's case be DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to comply with an order of the court. 2. That the clerk be directed to change the docket to reflect that Plaintiff Terence Thompson is terminated as a Plaintiff in this cause of action. Case No.: 3:08cv272/MCR/EMT
Page 2 of 2
At Pensacola, Florida, this 2nd day of December 2008.
/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within ten 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. A copy of objections shall be served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of appellate review of factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir. 1988).
Case No: 3:08cv272/MCR/EMT
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?