Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-arwd-6_24-cv-06049/USCOURTS-arwd-6_24-cv-06049-1/pdf.json

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

---

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

HOT SPRINGS DIVISION

DUSTIN LEMUEL HORN PLAINTIFF

v. Case No. 6:24-cv-06049

MRS. PETERSON, Kitchen Supervisor, 

Omega Unit; LIEUTENANT MARTIN, 

Omega Unit; and SERGEANT ANDERSON, 

Omega Unit DEFENDANTS

ORDER

Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation filed by the Honorable Mark E. 

Ford, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Arkansas. ECF No. 8. Plaintiff 

Dustin Lemuel Horn, representing himself in this action, has responded with timely objections. 

ECF No. 12. The Court finds the matter ripe for consideration. 

On April 10, 2024, Plaintiff filed his complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and his 

claims center around the denial of medical care after Defendant allegedly broke his tooth from 

biting into a foreign metal object in his food provided by the Omega Unit kitchen. ECF No. 1. 

Plaintiff is suing all Defendants in their individual and official capacities. On April 24, 2024, the 

Court entered an Order denying Plaintiff’s in forma pauperis (“IFP”) application and directing 

him to pay the filing and administrative fees totaling $405.00 by May 14, 2024. ECF No. 5. To 

date, Plaintiff has failed to pay the filing fee and has not sought an extension to do so. Judge 

Ford recommends dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) without prejudice for failure to 

prosecute this case and for failure to comply with the Court’s local rules and orders pursuant to 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and Local Rule 5.5(c)(2). ECF No. 8. Plaintiff objects. 

ECF No. 12.

Case 6:24-cv-06049-SOH-MEF Document 14 Filed 06/04/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:

<pageID>
2

In his objections, Plaintiff asserts that on May 3, 2024, “Plaintiff was called to the 

warden’s office and told a check in the amount of $405.00 was being mailed to the District Court 

clerk,” and that within two hours that amount was removed from his commissary account. ECF 

No. 12, p. 2. Plaintiff asserts that if the deadline to pay the federal filing fee was not met, it was 

not because of him or something he did wrong, “but because of either the warden or his 

business/finance secretary at the Omega Unit.” ECF No. 12-1, p. 1-2. Thus, Plaintiff requests 

that the Court rule in favor of his objection. ECF No. 12, p. 2. 

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), a district court has the power to 

dismiss an action based on “the plaintiff’s failure to comply with any court order.” Brown v. 

Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1986) (emphasis added). Plaintiff has still failed to ensure 

the payment of his filing and administrative fees in accordance with the Court’s Order. See ECF 

No. 5. Consequently, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Complaint (ECF No. 1) should be 

dismissed. 

The Court has conducted a de novo review and finds that the objections lodged by 

Plaintiff offer neither law nor fact requiring departure from Judge Ford’s recommendation that 

this case be dismissed. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objections are overruled, and the Court adopts 

the instant report and recommendation (ECF No. 8) in toto. This case is hereby DISMISSED 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE.0F

1

 

IT IS SO ORDERED, this 4th day of June, 2024.

/s/ Susan O. Hickey 

Susan O. Hickey

Chief United States District Judge

1 After Plaintiff locates his money, he may refile his case. 

Case 6:24-cv-06049-SOH-MEF Document 14 Filed 06/04/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:

<pageID>