Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

WENDELL RAY HURLEY,

Plaintiff, 

vs. Case No.: 3:11cv296/LAC/EMT

DAVID MORGAN

 Defendant.

__________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Plaintiff commenced this action

by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (doc. 1). He moved to dismiss his case on

September 20, 2011 (doc. 19), and this court recommended that the motion be granted (see doc. 20). 

On October 24, 2011 the court vacated its recommendation upon Plaintiff’s motion and directed

Plaintiff to pay, within twenty-one days, the past due initial partial filing fee of $12.91, as well as

any amounts that had become due since that amount was assessed on July 22, 2011 (see docs. 15,

22). On November 23, 2011, after Plaintiff failed to timely comply, the court entered an order

directing Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed due to his failure to comply

with the order dated October 24, 2011, as he had made only a single payment of $8.00 (see docs. 23,

24). Plaintiff was advised that if he intended to proceed with this action, as part of his response to

the court’s order he would be required to submit an updated inmate trust account statement from July

1, 2011, through the date of that order so the undersigned could verify his timely compliance with

his obligation to the court. Another $10.00 partial filing fee payment was received on December 5,

2011 (doc. 25), but no account statement was filed.

On December 20, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time in which to comply

(doc. 26), which was granted and the date for compliance was extended to January 21, 2012 (doc.

28). That time elapsed with nothing further filed by Plaintiff; therefore, on February 1, 2012, the

Case 3:11-cv-00296-LC-EMT Document 30 Filed 02/27/12 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to show cause, within twenty-one (21) days, why this action

should not be dismissed for his repeated failure to timely comply with court orders (doc. 29). The

time for compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed, with no response from Plaintiff.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s repeated failure to timely

comply with court orders and that all pending motions be denied as moot. 

At Pensacola, Florida, this 27th day of February 2012.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only. A copy of objections shall be

served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of appellate review of

factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir.

1988).

Case No: 3:11cv296/LAC/EMT

Case 3:11-cv-00296-LC-EMT Document 30 Filed 02/27/12 Page 2 of 2