Scott v. Hill et al

Filing 7

OPINION AND ORDER adopting Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand's Final Report and Recommendation 4 and dismissing this action without prejudice. Signed by Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. on 6/20/18. (ddm)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION
RICARDO LECON SCOTT,
Inmate No. 1719055,
Petitioner,
1:17-cv-4153-WSD

v.
VICTOR HILL, et al.,
Respondents.

OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand’s Final
Report and Recommendation [4] (“Final R&R”) recommending dismissing the
action without prejudice.
On October 18, 2017, Petitioner Ricardo Lecon Scott (“Petitioner”) sent the
Court a “barely legible” § 2241 federal habeas corpus petition (“§ 2241 Petition”)
with approximately 72 handwritten pages attached. ([1]; see also [4] at 1). Also
accompanying his § 2241 Petition was Petitioner’s Application to Proceed In
Forma Pauperis [2], but without the required executed financial affidavit with an
authorization allowing his custodian to withdraw funds from his inmate account or
a completed certificate signed by an authorized institutional officer regarding the

current balance in his inmate account.
On November 21, 2017, the Court entered an Order [3] (“November 21st
Order”) instructing Petitioner to amend the petition by using computer processed,
typed or legible handprint on one-sided, double-spaced lines. The November 21st
Order also instructed Petitioner to either pay the $5.00 filing fee or return a proper
request to proceed in forma pauperis. (Id.). Petitioner was advised that failure to
comply with the Court’s instructions within thirty (30) days could result in
dismissal of the action. (Id.). On January 25, 2018, the Magistrate Judge issued
the Final R&R recommending dismissal without prejudice. ([4]). No party filed
objections to the Final R&R.
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, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied,
459 U.S. 1112 (1983). Where, as here, no parties filed objections to the Final
R&R, the Court reviews it for plain error. United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093,
1095 (11th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1050 (1984).
The Magistrate Judge found Petitioner in violation of a lawful Court order
because he failed to either submit the $5 filing fee or provide a proper request to

2

proceed in forma pauperis. ([4] at 2); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); LR 41.3A(2),
NDGa. The Court finds no plain error in the Magistrate Judge’s findings or
recommendation.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand’s Final
Report and Recommendation [4] is ADOPTED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE.

SO ORDERED this 20th day of June, 2018.

3