Bryant v. Perry et al

Filing 11

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 2 Complaint filed by Shaun A. Bryant that it is RECOMMENDED that this case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Objections to R&R due by 4/27/2017. Signed by Magistrate Judge Terence P. Kemp on 4/13/17. (sem)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
Shaun A. Bryant,

:

Plaintiff,
v.
Major Perry, et al.,
Defendants.

:Case No.

2:16-cv-1189

:CHIEF JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.
Magistrate Judge Kemp
:
:

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff, a state prisoner, has submitted a request to file
a civil action in forma pauperis.

Because the request was not

accompanied by sufficient information to allow the Court to
determine what filing fee to assess, in an order dated February
13, 2017, the Court directed him to submit, within 30 days of the
date of that order, a certified account statement from the prison
cashier which indicated both the average monthly balance in his
account for the last six months and the amount of income credited
to his account during those months.
Plaintiff has not responded to that order.

Ordinarily, the

Court would then assess the full filing fee and dismiss the case
if the fee were not paid within thirty days.

However, the last

two orders of the Court (Docs. 4 and 9), which include the order
directing Plaintiff to submit the certified account statement,
have been returned as undeliverable.

It appears that Plaintiff

is no longer housed at the Franklin County Corrections Center,
which is the address provided by him when the case was filed.
has not updated his address.

Under these circumstances, the

Court assumes that he no longer has an interest in prosecuting
this case.

It is therefore recommended that the case be

dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

He

PROCEDURE ON OBJECTIONS
If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that
party may, within fourteen days of the date of this Report, file
and serve on all parties written objections to those specific
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made,
together with supporting authority for the objection(s).

A judge

of this Court shall make a de novo determination of those
portions of the report or specified proposed findings or
recommendations to which objection is made.

Upon proper

objections, a judge of this Court may accept, reject, or modify,
in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made herein,
may receive further evidence or may recommit this matter to the
magistrate judge with instructions.

28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1).

The parties are specifically advised that failure to object
to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the
right to have the district judge review the Report and
Recommendation de novo, and also operates as a waiver of the
right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the
Report and Recommendation.

See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140

(1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir.1981).

/s/ Terence P. Kemp
United States Magistrate Judge

-2-