Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_07-cv-00068/USCOURTS-almd-2_07-cv-00068-2/pdf.json

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

---

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

RON HARRIS, #230895, )

 )

 Plaintiff, )

 )

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:07-CV-68-ID

 ) [WO]

 )

J. C. GILES, et al., )

 )

 Defendants. )

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Ron Harris ["Harris"], a state inmate, filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action in which he

challenges a disciplinary lodged against him for indecent exposure/exhibitionism. Upon

review of the complaint, the court deemed it necessary that Harris file an amended

complaint and therefore entered an order requiring that he undertake such action. Order

of January 23, 2007 - Court Doc. No. 5. The court specifically cautioned Harris that his

"fail[ure] to comply with the directives of this order" would result in entry of a

recommendation "that this case be dismissed." Id. at 2. The time allowed Harris for filing

an amended complaint in compliance with the directives of the aforementioned order

expired on February 7, 2007. As of the present date, Harris has failed to file the requisite

amended complaint. The court therefore concludes that this case should be dismissed.

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

be dismissed without prejudice for failure of the plaintiff to comply with the orders of this

Case 2:07-cv-00068-ID-SRW Document 8 Filed 02/20/07 Page 1 of 2
2

court and his failure to properly prosecute this action. 

It is further

ORDERED that on or before March 4, 2007 the parties may file objections to the

Recommendation. Any objection must specifically identify the findings in the

Recommendation objected to. Frivolous, 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 in the Recommendation

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 decisions of the former

Fifth Circuit issued prior to September 30, 1981.

DONE, this 20th day of February, 2007.

/s/ Susan Russ Walker 

SUSAN RUSS WALKER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:07-cv-00068-ID-SRW Document 8 Filed 02/20/07 Page 2 of 2