IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

GINGER L. EDWARDS, 

Plaintiff, 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

vs. CIVIL NO. 4:22-CV-555-P 

GRANT H .. JACK, et al., 

Defendants. 

ORDER RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL 

AND RETURNING CASE TO DISTRICT ,JUDGE 

On June 29, 2022,pro se Plaintiff Ginger L. Edwards filed the above-styled and referenced 

case. On June 29, 2022, Edwards filed her Motion for Leave to Proceed infim11a pauperis [doc. 

3]. The Court denied Edwards' Motion for Leave to Proceed infonna pauperis [doc. 3] on July 

1, 2022 and Ordered her to pay the required $402 filing and administrative fees to the Clerk of 

Court no later than July 15, 2022 [doc. 8]. Edwards filed an untitled Motion [doc. 9] with the 

Court on July 18, 2022, requesting additional time to pay the requisite filing and administrative 

fees. On July 19, 2022, the Court issued and Order [ doc. 19] granting Edwards until August 2, 

2022, to pay the applicable fees and informing Edwards that, "[i]f she fails to pay the applicable 

fees by this extended deadline ... this case will be subject to dismissal without prejudice as 

provided by Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure." As of the elate of this Order, 

Edwards has failed to comply with the Court's Order and pay the applicable fees. 

Consequently, the Court RECOMMENDS that the above-styled and numbered cause be 

DISMISSED for failing to comply with the Court's Order. 

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO OBJECT TO PROPOSED 

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION 

AND CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE TO OBJECT 

Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l), each party to this action has the right to serve and file specific 

written objections in the United States District Court to the United States Magistrate Judge's 

Case 4:22-cv-00555-P Document 11 Filed 08/03/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 29
proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation within fourteen (14) days after the party has 

been served with a copy of this document. The United States District Judge need only make a de 

nova determination of those portions of the United States Magistrate Judge's proposed findings, 

conclusions and recommendation to which specific objection is timely made. See 28 U.S.C. § 

636(6)(1). Failure to file, by the elate stated above, a specific written objection to a proposed 

factual finding or legal conclusion will bar a party, except upon grounds of plain error or manifest 

injustice, from attacking on appeal any such proposed factual findings and legal conclusions 

accepted by the United States District Judge. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto Ass '11, 79 F.3d 

1415, 1428-29 (5th Cir. 1996) (en bane), superseded by statute on other grounds, 28 U.S.C. § 

636(6)(1) (extending time to file objections from ten lo fourteen days). 

ORDER 

Under 28 U.S.C. § 636, it is hereby ORDERED that each party is granted until August 

17, 2022, to serve and file written objections to the United States Magistrate Judge's proposed 

findings, conclusions and recommendation. It is forther ORDERED that if objections are filed 

and the opposing party chooses to file a response, the response shall be filed within seven (7) days 

of the filing date of the objections. 

It is further ORDERED that the above-styled and numbered action, previously referred to 

the United States Magistrate Judge for findings, conclusions and recommendation, be and hereby 

is returned lo the docket of the United Stales District Ju ,e. 

SIGNED August 3, 2022. 

. CURETON 

I'ATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 4:22-cv-00555-P Document 11 Filed 08/03/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 30