ESCOFFERY v. SHALIMAR POINTE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

Filing 6

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION - Re: 1 MOTION for Temporary Restraining Order - That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Pltf's failure to prosecute. Signed by MAGISTRATE JUDGE ELIZABETH M TIMOTHY on 4/2/2009. Internal deadline for referral to district judge if objections are not filed earlier: 4/30/2009. (laj)

Download PDF
Page 1 of 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION WILLIAM ESCOFFERY, III, Plaintiff, vs. SHALIMAR POINTE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, Defendant. __________________________________/ REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff attempted to initiate this action on October 31, 2008, by filing a Motion for Temporary Restraining Order (see Doc. 1). On November 3, 2008, however, Plaintiff was advised that he cannot commence a civil action by filing a motion, and further, that if Plaintiff wished to initiate a civil action he would be required to file a complaint on the court-approved form (see Doc. 2). Additionally, Plaintiff was provided with a copy of the court-approved form for filing his complaint (id.). Upon a recent review of the docket, it appeared that no activity had taken place in this case since November 4, 2008, the date the court received the filing fee from Plaintiff (see Docket Entry 4); therefore, on March 9, 2009, this court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to show cause, within twenty (20) days, why this action should not be dismissed for want of prosecution (Doc. 5).1 The time for compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed with no response from Plaintiff. Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED: That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute. Case No.: 3:08cv500/LAC/EMT Pursuant to Rule 41.1(A) of the Local Rules for the Northern District of Florida, whenever it appears that no activity by filing of pleadings, orders of the court or otherwise has occurred for a period of more than ninety (90) days, the court may enter an order to show cause why the case should not be dismissed. If no satisfactory cause is shown, the case may be dismissed by the court for want of prosecution. N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 41.1(A); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 1 Page 2 of 2 At Pensacola, Florida, this 2nd day of April 2009. /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: 3:08cv500/LAC/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?