Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-2_05-cv-02032/USCOURTS-arwd-2_05-cv-02032-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 555
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Prison Condition
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

FORT SMITH DIVISION

ERIC G. HENSON PLAINTIFF

v. Civil No. 05-2032

RUTH ANN CRANFORD HOWELL, Jail Administrator; 

BRANDON REYNOLDS, Jailer; TODD RUSSELL, Jailer;

and JUSTIN CASTELMAN, Jailer DEFENDANT

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Eric G. Henson brings this pro se civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

(Doc. 1.) When the plaintiff failed to supply an in forma pauperis (IFP) application or pay the

$250.00 filing fee, as ordered (Doc. 2) by the court, a report and recommendation (Doc. 3) was

entered which recommended dismissal of this case for the plaintiff's failure to comply the court's

order. The district court adopted (Doc. 4) this report, and the case was dismissed.

The plaintiff then filed a motion to reopen the case. (Doc. 5.) The motion was referred

(Doc. 6) to the undersigned, and granted (Doc. 7) in part due to plaintiff's claims that officials

at the Johnson County Detention Center would not complete the section concerning funds

available in his prison account at the Johnson County Detention Center. On August 9, 2005, a

change of address was entered for plaintiff, indicating that the plaintiff was then detained by the

Arkansas Department of Correction (ADC). As the plaintiff still had not paid the filing fee or

submitted an IFP application, the court directed the another IFP application be sent to the

plaintiff and that he have officials at ADC complete the information concerning his prison trust

account and return the IFP application to the court by September 23, 2005. (Doc. 12.) 

When plaintiff failed to comply with this order, the court entered an show cause order

Case 2:05-cv-02032-RTD Document 18 Filed 11/16/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>
AO72A

(Rev. 8/82)

-2-

(Doc. 17), giving the plaintiff until November 1, 2005 to explain to the court why his complaint

should not be dismissed for failure to comply the court's later order to supply an IFP application

or pay the filing fee. 

To date, the plaintiff has not complied with the August 22 order to supply the IFP

application or the October 13 order to show cause. Neither of the orders have been returned to

the court as undeliverable. The plaintiff was warned in the show cause order that his failure to

respond would result in dismissal of this action. 

Therefore, I recommend that this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute or obey an

order of the court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

Henson has ten days from receipt of this report and recommendation in which to

file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely written

objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. Henson is

reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the

district court. 

DATED this 16th day of November 2005.

/s/ Beverly Stites Jones

_________________________________________

HON. BEVERLY STITES JONES 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-02032-RTD Document 18 Filed 11/16/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: <pageID>