Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

JOSE ORTIZ RODRIGUEZ,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00143-MP-GRJ

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS, et al

Defendants.

_____________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter was transferred from the Southern District of Florida on July 27,

2010. Plaintiff claims that the Florida Department of Corrections is serving excessive

amounts of soy protein causing health issues for the Plaintiff. (Doc. 1.) Plaintiff was

directed to file an amended complaint using the standard complaint forms, as required

by N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 5.1(J), and advised that he must either pay the full filing fee or file a

motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and provide inmate account information.

(Doc. 11.) Plaintiff was warned that if he failed to comply with the Order on or before

August 13, 2010, it would be recommended that his case be dismissed. (Doc. 11.) 

Because Plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint and failed to provide the required

financial information by the August 13, 2010 deadline the Court entered a show cause

order on October 18, 2010 directing Plaintiff to show cause by November 5, 2010 why

this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Doc. 13.) The docket

reflects that Plaintiff has failed to file a response to the show cause order, has failed to

file an amended complaint and has failed to file the required financial information.

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to
Page 2 of 2

prosecute. Link v. Wabash Railroad, 370 U.S. 626 (1962); Eades v. Alabama Dept. of

Human Resources, 298 Fed. Appx. 862 (11th Cir. 2008) (district court has discretion to

dismiss case sua sponte where plaintiff has failed to comply with court orders and was

on notice that such failure may result in dismissal). Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) also

authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for failure to obey a court order. 

Plaintiff has failed to comply with two Orders of this Court directing that he file an

amended complaint and provide financial information. (docs. 11 and 13.) Plaintiff was

advised that failure to comply with the Court’s Orders would result in a recommendation

that his case be dismissed. And since this case was transferred to this Court on July 26,

2010 the Plaintiff has not filed anything further thus evidencing that Plaintiff has no

interest in advancing this case.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

without prejudice.

At Gainesville, Florida, this 28 day of March, 2011.

th

s/Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2), a party may file specific, written objections to

the proposed findings and recommendations within 14 days after being served with a

copy of this report and recommendation. A party may respond to another party’s

objections within 14 days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific

objections limits the scope of review of proposed factual findings and

recommendations.

Case No: 1:10-cv-00143-MP -GRJ