Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alsd-1_23-cv-00451/USCOURTS-alsd-1_23-cv-00451-1/pdf.json

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

---

Page 1 of 2 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

JAMES STANBACK, ) 

) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) 

vs. ) CIV. ACT. NO. 1:23-cv-451-TFM-MU

) 

OFFICER EVANS, et al., ) 

) 

Defendants. ) 

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER 

On January 31, 2024, the Magistrate Judge entered a report and recommendation which 

recommends this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and to comply with 

the court’s orders. See Doc. 5. No objections were filed and the deadline has passed. 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes dismissal of a complaint for failure to prosecute or failure 

to comply with a court order or the federal rules. Gratton v. Great Am. Commc’ns, 178 F.3d 1373, 

1374 (11th Cir. 1999). Further, such a dismissal may be done on motion of the defendant or sua 

sponte as an inherent power of the court. Betty K Agencies, Ltd. v. M/V Monada, 432 F.3d 1333, 

1337 (11th Cir. 2005). “[D]ismissal upon disregard of an order, especially where the litigant has 

been forewarned, generally is not an abuse of discretion.” Vil v. Perimeter Mortg. Funding Corp., 

715 F. App’x 912, 915 (quoting Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989)). “[E]ven 

a non-lawyer should realize the peril to [his] case, when [he] . . . ignores numerous notices” and 

fails to comply with court orders. Anthony v. Marion Cty. Gen. Hosp., 617 F.2d 1164, 1169 (5th 

Cir. 1980); see also Moon, 863 F.2d at 837 (As a general rule, where a litigant has been forewarned, 

dismissal for failure to obey a court order is not an abuse of discretion.). Therefore, the Court 

finds it appropriate to exercise its “inherent power” to “dismiss [Plaintiff’s claims] sua sponte for 

Case 1:23-cv-00451-TFM-MU Document 7 Filed 02/29/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:

<pageID>
Page 2 of 2 

lack of prosecution.” Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630, 82 S. Ct. 1386, 8 L. Ed. 2d 734 

(1962); see also Betty K Agencies, Ltd., 432 F.3d at 1337 (describing the judicial power to dismiss 

sua sponte for failure to comply with court orders). 

Since the filing of his complaint on November 29, 2023, there has been no additional action 

by the Plaintiff despite an order for him to pay the filing fee or a motion to proceed in forma 

pauperis. See Doc. 4. Further, Plaintiff failed to advise the Court of his change in address and the 

mail was returned as undeliverable. 

Accordingly, after due and proper consideration of all portions of this file deemed relevant 

to the issues raised, and there having been no objections filed, the Report and Recommendation of 

the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED and this action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure 

to prosecute and obey the Court’s orders.

DONE and ORDERED this 29th day of February, 2024. 

 /s/Terry F. Moorer 

 TERRY F. MOORER 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 1:23-cv-00451-TFM-MU Document 7 Filed 02/29/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:

<pageID>