Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alsd-1_16-cv-00484/USCOURTS-alsd-1_16-cv-00484-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Joseph Hachey
Plaintiff
Thomas Powell
Defendant

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JOSEPH HACHEY, :

: 

Plaintiff, :

 :

vs. : CIVIL ACTION 16-00484-CG-M 

: 

THOMAS POWELL, :

:

 Defendant. : 

 

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff, an Alabama prison inmate proceeding pro se and 

in forma pauperis, filed a Complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and 

a Motion to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees. This action has 

been referred to the undersigned pursuant for appropriate action 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and S.D. Ala. Gen.LR 

72(a)(2)(R), and is before the Court for Plaintiff’s failure to 

comply with the Court’s Order and to prosecute this action.

This action was transferred from the Middle District of 

Alabama and filed in the Southern District of Alabama on 

September 13, 2016 (Doc. 8). Since Plaintiff’s § 1983 complaint 

and motion to proceed without prepayment of fees were not on 

this Court’s forms, Plaintiff was ordered to complete and file 

this court’s forms for a § 1983 complaint and for a motion to 

proceed without prepayment of fees by October 19, 2016 (Doc. 9). 

Plaintiff was warned that his failure to comply with the Court’s 

Case 1:16-cv-00484-CG-M Document 10 Filed 11/03/16 Page 1 of 4
2

Order would result in dismissal of this action for failure to 

prosecute and to obey the Court’s Order (Doc. 9). The Order and 

forms were mailed to Plaintiff at Limestone Correctional 

Facility, 28779 Nick Davis Road, Harvest, Alabama 35749, his 

last known address. To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the 

Court’s Order, nor has the Order and form been returned as 

undeliverable. Thus, the Court finds that Plaintiff has 

abandoned prosecution of this action.

Due to Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's Order 

and to prosecute this action, and upon consideration of the 

alternatives that are available to the Court, it is recommended 

that this action be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 

41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to 

prosecute and to obey the Court's Order, as no other lesser 

sanction will suffice. Link v. Wabash R. R., 370 U.S. 626, 630, 

82 S.Ct. 1386, 1388-89, 8 L.Ed.2d 734, 738 (1962) (interpreting 

Rule 41(b) not to restrict the court's inherent authority to 

dismiss sua sponte an action for lack of prosecution); see also

World Thrust Films, Inc. v. International Family Entm’t, Inc., 

41 F.3d 1454, 1456-57 (11th Cir. 1995) (requesting the court to 

consider lesser sanctions); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 

864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989)(Same); Goforth v. Owens, 766 

F.2d 1533, 1535 (11th Cir. 1985)(Same); Jones v. Graham, 709 

F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1983)(Same); Blunt v. U.S. Tobacco 

Case 1:16-cv-00484-CG-M Document 10 Filed 11/03/16 Page 2 of 4
3

Co., 856 F.2d 192 (6th Cir.1988) (Unpublished); Accord Chambers 

v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 45-46 (1991)(ruling that federal 

courts' inherent power to manage their own proceedings 

authorized the imposition of attorney's fees and related 

expenses as a sanction); Malautea v. Suzuki Motor Co., 987 F.2d 

1536, 1545-46 (11th Cir.)(finding that the courts’ inherent 

power to manage actions before it permitted the imposition of 

fines), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 683 (1993).

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO FILE OBJECTIONS

A copy of this report and recommendation shall be served on all 

parties in the manner provided by law. Any party who objects to 

this recommendation or anything in it must, within fourteen (14) 

days of the date of service of this document, file specific 

written objections with the Clerk of this Court. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1); FED.R.CIV.P. 72(b); S.D. ALA. Gen.LR 72(c). The 

parties should note that under Eleventh Circuit Rule 3-1, “[a] 

party failing to object to a magistrate judge's findings or 

recommendations contained in a report and recommendation in 

accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives 

the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order 

based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions if the 

party was informed of the time period for objecting and the 

consequences on appeal for failing to object. In the absence of 

Case 1:16-cv-00484-CG-M Document 10 Filed 11/03/16 Page 3 of 4
4

a proper objection, however, the court may review on appeal for 

plain error if necessary in the interests of justice.” 11th 

Cir. R. 3-1. In order to be specific, an objection must 

identify the specific finding or recommendation to which 

objection is made, state the basis for the objection, and 

specify the place in the Magistrate Judge’s report and 

recommendation where the disputed determination is found. An 

objection that merely incorporates by reference or refers to the 

briefing before the Magistrate Judge is not specific.

DONE this 3rd day of November, 2016.

s/BERT W. MILLING, JR. 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:16-cv-00484-CG-M Document 10 Filed 11/03/16 Page 4 of 4