Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_15-cv-00755/USCOURTS-almd-2_15-cv-00755-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

KUMOSKI WHITLOCK, ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:15-CV-755-WKW 

 ) [WO] 

22ND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, et al., ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 

 On October 19, 2012 the court entered an order granting Plaintiff fourteen days to 

file an amended complaint. Doc. No. 4. Plaintiff was cautioned that his failure to comply 

with the court’s October 19 order would result in a Recommendation that his complaint 

be dismissed. Id. The requisite time has passed and Plaintiff has not complied with the 

order of the court. Consequently, the court concludes that dismissal of this case is 

appropriate for Plaintiff’s failures to prosecute this action and comply with the orders of 

the court. 

 Accordingly, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that this 

case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failures to prosecute this action and 

comply with the orders of this court. 

It is further 

ORDERED that the parties are DIRECTED to file any objections to the said 

Recommendation on or before December 8, 2015. A party must specifically identify the 

Case 2:15-cv-00755-WKW-WC Document 5 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 2
factual findings and legal conclusions in the Recommendation to which objection is 

made; frivolous, conclusive, or general objections will not be considered. Failure to file 

written objections to the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations in accordance 

with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) shall bar a party from a de novo

determination by the District Court of legal and factual issues covered in the 

Recommendation and waives the right of the party to challenge on appeal the district 

court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions accepted or adopted by 

the District Court except upon grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Nettles v. 

Wainwright, 677 F.2d 404 (5th Cir. 1982); 11th Cir. R. 3-1; see Stein v. Lanning 

Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11th Cir. 1982); see also Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661 

F.2d 1206 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc). The parties are advised that this Recommendation 

is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not appealable. 

Done this 24th day of November, 2015. 

 /s/ Wallace Capel, Jr. 

 WALLACE CAPEL, JR. 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:15-cv-00755-WKW-WC Document 5 Filed 11/24/15 Page 2 of 2