IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

GEORGE PARKER, )

AIS #140922, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06-CV-649-WHA

 ) [WO]

)

GWENDOLYN GIVENS, et al., )

)

 Defendants. )

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This cause is before the court on a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint filed by George

Parker [“Parker”], a state inmate, on July 21, 2006. The defendants filed a written report

in compliance with the orders of this court in which they addressed Parker’s claims for

relief. Specifically, the defendants submitted relevant evidentiary materials that refuted the

allegations presented in the complaint. The court thereafter issued an order directing Parker

to file a response to the written report. See Order of September 6, 2006 - Court Doc. No.

13. The order advised Parker that his failure to respond to the defendants’ written report

would be treated by the court “as an abandonment of the claims set forth in the

complaint and as a failure to prosecute this action.” Id. at 1 (emphasis in original).

Additionally, the order “specifically cautioned [the plaintiff] that [his failure] to file a

response in compliance with the directives of this order” would result in the dismissal

of this civil action. Id. 

The time allotted Parker for filing a response to this order expired on September 20,

Case 2:06-cv-00649-WHA-WC Document 16 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 1 of 3
2

2006. As of the present date, Parker has filed nothing in opposition to the defendants’

written report as required by the orders of this court. In light of the foregoing, the court

concludes that this case should be dismissed.

The court has reviewed the file in this case to determine whether a less drastic

measure than dismissal is appropriate. After such review, it is clear that dismissal of this

case is the proper course of action. Parker is an indigent state inmate. Thus, the imposition

of monetary or other punitive sanctions against him would be ineffectual. Additionally,

Parker has voluntarily chosen not to comply with the directives of the orders entered in this

case. 

It is therefore apparent that any additional effort by this court to secure Parker’s

compliance would be unavailing. Moreover, the response and undisputed evidentiary

materials filed by the defendants indicate that Parker is not entitled to any relief in this

cause of action. Consequently, the court concludes that Parker’s abandonment of his

claims, his failure to comply with the orders of this court and his failure to prosecute this

cause of action warrant dismissal of this case. 

 

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, it is the RECOMMENDATION of the Magistrate Judge

that this case be dismissed without prejudice. It is further

ORDERED that on or before 11 October 2006 the parties may file objections to the

Case 2:06-cv-00649-WHA-WC Document 16 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 2 of 3
3

Recommendation. Any objections filed must specifically identify the findings in the

Magistrate Judge's Recommendation to which the party is objecting. 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 advisements in the

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

the District Court of issues covered in the Recommendation and shall bar the party from

attacking on appeal factual findings in the Recommendation 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 27 day of September, 2006. th

/s/ Vanzetta Penn McPherson

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00649-WHA-WC Document 16 Filed 09/27/2006 Page 3 of 3