Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_05-cv-00505/USCOURTS-almd-2_05-cv-00505-0/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

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

 __________________________________

DEMON SLATER, #177 985 *

Plaintiff, *

v. * CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:05-CV-505-D

(WO)

SGT. DAVIDSON, et al., *

Defendants. *

 __________________________________ 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On July 12, 2005 the undersigned directed Plaintiff to file an amendment to his

complaint concerning the factual allegations contained therein. (Doc. No. 7.) Plaintiff was

cautioned that his failure to comply with the July 12 order would result in a Recommendation

that his complaint be dismissed without further notice from the court. (Id.) The requisite time

has passed and Plaintiff has not responded to the order that he amend his complaint.

Consequently, the court concludes that dismissal of this case is appropriate for Plaintiff’s

failure to 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 failure to 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 August 18, 2005. Any objections filed must specifically

identify the findings in the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation objected to. Frivolous,

Case 2:05-cv-00505-ID-CSC Document 8 Filed 08/05/05 Page 1 of 2
conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. The parties are

advised that this Recommendation is not a final order of the court and, therefore, it is not

appealable.

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the

Magistrate Judge's report shall bar the party from a de novo determination by the District

Court of issues covered in the report and shall bar the party from attacking on appeal factual

findings in the report 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). See Stein

v. Reynolds 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), adopting as binding precedent all of the

decisions of the former Fifth Circuit handed down prior to the close of business on

September 30, 1981.

Done this 5th day of August, 2005.

 /s/Charles S. Coody 

CHARLES S. COODY

CHIEF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:05-cv-00505-ID-CSC Document 8 Filed 08/05/05 Page 2 of 2