Logan v. Chambers et al

Filing 4

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION of the U.S. Magistrate Judge that re #1 Complaint should be dismissed without prejudice and this civil action should be closed. Objections to R&R due by 5/28/2024. Signed by Magistrate Judge Brian K. Epps on 5/10/24. (loh)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
DUBLIN DIVISION
DOUGLAS DESEAN LOGAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
WARDEN BRIAN CHAMBERS;
CHABARA BRAGG; MS. MESSIER; and
OFFICER MANKUS,
Defendants.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

CV 324-016

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
According to Local Rule 4.1, the commencement of a civil action requires compliance
with four specific criteria, including the presentation of the original complaint and the
appropriate filing fee, or the original complaint and a petition to proceed in forma pauperis
(“IFP”). Also, Local Rule 11.1, in conjunction with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11,
requires every paper presented for filing to be signed by Plaintiff. When Plaintiff submitted
his complaint on March 28, 2024, he had not signed it, (see doc. no. 1), and he did not pay
the filing fee or submit a motion to proceed IFP. The Clerk of Court issued two deficiency
notices that same day regarding the need to sign his complaint and the need to pay the $405
filing fee or file a motion to proceed IFP, and the notices warned Plaintiff that failure to
correct the deficiencies could result in dismissal. (See doc. nos. 2, 3.) Plaintiff failed to
respond to the Clerk’s deficiency notices.
A district court has authority to manage its docket to expeditiously resolve cases, and
this authority includes the power to dismiss a case for failure to prosecute or failure to

comply with a court order. Equity Lifestyle Props., Inc. v. Fla. Mowing & Landscape Serv.,
Inc., 556 F.3d 1232, 1240 (11th Cir. 2009) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)); see also Eades v.
Ala. Dep’t of Hum. Res., 298 F. App’x 862, 863 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (“District
courts possess the ability to dismiss a case . . . for want of prosecution based on two possible
sources of authority: Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) or their inherent authority to manage their
dockets.”). Moreover, the Local Rules of the Southern District of Georgia dictate that an
“assigned Judge may, after notice to counsel of record, sua sponte . . . dismiss any action for
want of prosecution, with or without prejudice . . . [for] [w]illful disobedience or neglect of
any order of the Court; or [a]ny other failure to prosecute a civil action with reasonable
promptness.” Loc. R. 41.1 (b) & (c).
Plaintiff did not comply with the requirements for commencing a civil action by filing
an unsigned complaint unaccompanied by the full filing fee or a motion to proceed IFP, and
when given the opportunity to correct the deficiencies, Plaintiff failed to respond to the
Clerk’s notices. Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the filing requirements of the Local Rules
and his failure to respond to the Clerk’s deficiency notices amounts not only to a failure to
prosecute, but also an abandonment of his case.
In sum, the time to respond has passed, and Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee or
submitted a motion to proceed IFP as required. Accordingly, the Court REPORTS and
RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice and CLOSED.
SO REPORTED and RECOMMENDED this 10th day of May, 2024, at Augusta,
Georgia.

2