Thurman v. State of Georgia
Filing
5
OPINION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anands Final Report and Recommendation 3 and dismissing without prejudice this action. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr on 12/6/16. (ddm)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
JEREMY THURMAN,
Petitioner,
v.
1:16-cv-3368-WSD
STATE OF GEORGIA,
Respondent.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand’s Final
Report and Recommendation [3] (“R&R”). The R&R recommends dismissal of
this action for failure to comply with a lawful order of the Court.
I.
BACKGROUND
On September 6, 2016, Petitioner Jeremy Thurman (“Petitioner”), submitted
what he styled as a “direct Appeal Motion,” and the Clerk docketed the pleading as
a habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254.
On September 20, 2016, the Magistrate Judge entered an Order instructing
Petitioner to submit the full filing fee or a request to proceed in forma pauperis,
and, if he did intend to file the action as a habeas petition in this Court, to amend
the petition on the proper forms to add factual allegations regarding the acts or
omissions he claims violated his constitutional rights. ([2]). The Magistrate Judge
advised Petitioner that failure to comply with the instructions may result in
dismissal of the petition. (Id.). Petitioner failed to pay the filing fee, submit a
request to proceed in forma pauperis, or submit the required amendment.
On November 11, 2016, the Magistrate Judge issued his R&R. The R&R
recommends dismissal, without prejudice, of this action for failure to comply with
a lawful order of the Court. Petitioner did not object 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).
No party objects to the R&R, and the Court thus conducts a plain error review of
the record. See United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983).
B.
Analysis
Under Local Rule 41.3(A)(2), “[t]he court may, with or without notice to the
parties, dismiss a civil case for want of prosecution if: . . . [a] plaintiff . . . shall,
2
after notice, . . . fail or refuse to obey a lawful order of the court in the case.” LR
41.3(A)(2), NDGa.
Plaintiff failed to comply with the Magistrate Judge’s Order after being
advised that failure to comply may result in dismissal of this action. The Court
finds no plain error in the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that this action be
dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to comply with a lawful order of the
Court. See Slay, 714 F.2d at 1095.
III.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand’s Final
Report and Recommendation [3] is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSSED
WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
SO ORDERED this 6th day of December, 2016.
3
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?