Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-2_12-cv-00165/USCOURTS-almd-2_12-cv-00165-1/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 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

DAVID LEE LITTLE, #214 158, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

 v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO.: 2:12-CV-165-WHA

) [WO]

KIM THOMAS, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On April 9, 2012 Plaintiff filed a response to the court’s March 27, 2012 order to

show cause why this case should not be dismissed for his failure to comply with the order

that he submit an initial partial filing fee. (Doc. No. 6.) In his response Plaintiff requests

dismissal of this case stating he did not want to commence this action and did not authorize

the Department of Corrections [“DOC”] to remove funds from his inmate account. (Id.) 

Plaintiff further requests that an order be entered directing the DOC to cease taking funds

from his inmate account and that fees already submitted to this court be returned to him. (Id.) 

Upon consideration of Plaintiff’s response, considered a motion to dismiss complaint, 

the court concludes that the motion is due to be granted. Furthermore, since the complaint

has not been served, the court finds that this case is due to be dismissed without prejudice. 

See Rule 41(a)(1), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Additionally, the court will direct the

Clerk to return to Plaintiff the partial filing fee received on April 3, 2012 and order that the

court’s February 28, 2012 order (Doc. No. 3) be withdrawn. 

Case 2:12-cv-00165-WHA-TFM Document 7 Filed 04/18/12 Page 1 of 3
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the court’s February 28, 2012 order directing

payment of the filing fee from Plaintiff’s inmate account (Doc. No. 3) be WITHDRAWN.

The Clerk is DIRECTED to return to Plaintiff $14.00 which represents the partial

filing fee received in the above-captioned action on April 3, 2012. The Clerk is further 1

DIRECTED to send a copy of this Order to the account clerk at the Draper Correctional

Facility.

It is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge that:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 6) be GRANTED;

2. This case be DISMISSED without prejudice; and

3. No costs or fees be taxed in this case.

 It is further

ORDERED that the parties may file any objections to the Recommendation on or

before May 2, 2012. Any objections filed must specifically identify the findings in the

Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which a party objects. 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 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

Plaintiff is advised that the processing of his check may take from two to four weeks. 1

2

Case 2:12-cv-00165-WHA-TFM Document 7 Filed 04/18/12 Page 2 of 3
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 (5 Cir. 1982). See Stein th

v. Reynolds Securities, Inc., 667 F.2d 33 (11 Cir. 1982). See also Bonner v. City of th

Prichard, 661 F.2d 1206 (11 Cir. 1981, en banc), adopting as binding precedent all of the th

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

September 30, 1981.

Done, this 18 day of April 2012. th

 /s/ Terry F. Moorer 

TERRY F. MOORER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

3

Case 2:12-cv-00165-WHA-TFM Document 7 Filed 04/18/12 Page 3 of 3