Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

CEDRIC BELL, #X29932

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:11cv119-MP/CAS

DR. MAURICE MARHALIC, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before me upon referral from the Clerk. In an order filed August 2,

2011, Plaintiff was directed to file a Third Amended complaint by September 6, 2011. 

Doc. 13. On August 31, 2011, Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time, doc. 14,

which the court granted and extended his time for filing the amended complaint to

November 1, 2011. Doc. 15. Because Plaintiff failed to file the Amended Complaint a

Report and Recommendation was entered on November 10, 2011, recommending

dismissal of his complaint for failing to comply with a court order. Doc. 18. On

December 5, 2011, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Reconsideration. Doc. 19. The court

granted Plaintiff's motion, vacated the Report and Recommendation and gave the

Case 4:11-cv-00119-MP-CAS Document 31 Filed 04/16/12 Page 1 of 3
Page 2 of 3

Plaintiff until January 13, 2012, to file his Third Amended Complaint as previously

directed. Because Plaintiff failed once again to comply with that order, another Report

and Recommendation was entered January 27, 2012, recommending dismissal.

Doc. 24. On January 30, 2012, Plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to comply

with the Court's previous order. Doc. 25. Once again the court vacated the Report and

Recommendaiton (doc. 24) and gave Plaintiff one final opportunity to file the Amended

Complaint by April 4, 2012. Plaintiff was again specifically warned of dismissal if he

failed to comply. Doc. 28. To date, no response has been received from the Plaintiff. 

Plaintiff has had ample opportunities to pursue this case and comply with court

orders. His complaint was filed over one year ago on March 24, 2011. Doc. 1. A trial

court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute. Link v.

Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)

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

Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 863

(1989). Since Plaintiff has failed to comply with an order or to prosecute this case, this

complaint should now be dismissed without prejudice. 

It is therefore, respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

without prejudice.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on April 16, 2012.

 S/ Charles A. Stampelos 

CHARLES A. STAMPELOS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case No. 4:11cv119-MP/CAS

Case 4:11-cv-00119-MP-CAS Document 31 Filed 04/16/12 Page 2 of 3
Page 3 of 3

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

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. 4:11cv119-MP/CAS

Case 4:11-cv-00119-MP-CAS Document 31 Filed 04/16/12 Page 3 of 3