Pinkston v. Sperry et al
Filing
9
OPINION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Russell G. Vineyards Final Report and Recommendation 7 and dismissing this action without prejudice. It is further ordered that Plaintiffs Application for Leave to Proceed in Forma Pauperis 2 and Motion to Expedite Injunction 4 are denied as moot. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 12/12/16. (ddm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
JABARR PINKSTON,
Plaintiff,
v.
1:16-cv-2704-WSD
CHRISPHER SPERRY, et al.,
Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Russell G. Vineyard’s
Final Report and Recommendation [7] (“R&R”). The R&R recommends the Court
dismiss this action without prejudice for Plaintiff Jabarr Pinkston’s (“Plaintiff”)
failure to prosecute and failure to comply with lawful orders of the Court.
I.
BACKGROUND
On July 25, 2016, Plaintiff filed his pro se Complaint [1] and a request to
proceed in forma pauperis [2] (“IFP Application”). The IFP Application did not
include (1) an authorization allowing his custodian to withdraw funds from his
inmate account, (2) a completed certificate signed by an authorized institutional
officer regarding the current balance in his inmate account, or (3) a copy of his
inmate trust account balance for the six-month period preceding the filing of the
instant action. Accordingly, on August 1, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued an
Order [3] (“August 1st Order”) requiring Plaintiff to file, within thirty days, an
amended complaint and to either pay the required court fees or submit a properly
completed financial affidavit. The August 1st Order advised Plaintiff that failure
to timely comply with the Order could result in dismissal of this action.
(August 1st Order at 4).
On August 10, 2016, Plaintiff submitted a motion to expedite injunction [4],
which listed a new address for Plaintiff. On September 8, 2016, after the copy of
the August 1st Order that was mailed to Plaintiff was returned to the Court as
undeliverable, the Clerk of Court mailed another copy of the Order with the
necessary forms to Plaintiff at the address listed on his motion to expedite
injunction. (See Clerks Certificate of Mailing, September 8, 2016). An additional
thirty days passed after the Clerk of Court mailed the second copy of the Order,
and Plaintiff failed to comply with the August 1st Order. On October 21, 2016, the
Magistrate Judge issued an Order [6] (“October 21st Order”) directing Plaintiff,
within twenty-one (21) days, to show cause why this action should not be
dismissed for failure to prosecute, and reminding him that failure to respond could
result in the dismissal of this action. Plaintiff failed to comply with the October
21st Order within the time period allowed.
2
On November 22, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued his R&R,
recommending the Court dismiss this action without prejudice for Plaintiff’s
failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the Magistrate Judge’s August 1st
and October 21st Orders. The Magistrate Judge also recommends the Court deny
as moot Plaintiff’s motion to expedite injunction. Plaintiff did not file any
objections to the R&R, and has not otherwise taken any action in this case.
II.
DISCUSSION
A.
Legal Standard
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams
v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983).
Where, as here, no party objects to the R&R, the Court conducts a plain error
review of the record. See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir.
1983).
B.
Analysis
Local Rule 41.3 authorizes the Court to dismiss a case for want of
prosecution for failure to obey a lawful order of the Court. See LR 41.3(A)(2).
Plaintiff failed to comply with the Magistrate Judge’s August 1st Order and its
3
October 21st Order, after twice being advised that failure to comply would result in
dismissal of this action. The Court finds no plain error in the Magistrate Judge’s
recommendation that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice for Plaintiff’s
failure to prosecute and failure to obey the Court’s orders. See Slay, 714 F.2d at
1095.
III.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Russell G. Vineyard’s
Final Report and Recommendation [7] is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Application for Leave to
Proceed in Forma Pauperis [2] and Motion to Expedite Injunction [4] are
DENIED AS MOOT.
SO ORDERED this 12th day of December, 2016.
4
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?