PARKER
v.
ESCAMBIA COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court recommended dismissal of the case without prejudice due to the plaintiff's failure to comply with court orders.
The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, failed to file a second amended civil rights complaint by the deadline. Subsequently, the plaintiff also failed to r…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Local Rules Of Civil Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, commenced this action by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. 1). On March 21, 2025, the Court entered an order directing Plaintiff to file a second amended civil rights complaint within thirty days. (Doc. 14). The Court directed the Clerk of Court to send Plaintiff the complaint form and notified Plaintiff that his failure to comply with an order of the Court would result in a recommendation of dismissal of this case. (Id. at 14-15).
Plaintiff did not file a second amended complaint by the deadline. Therefore, on April 29, 2025, the Court issued an order giving Plaintiff fourteen days to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for his failure to comply with a Court order. (Doc. 15). The Court notified Plaintiff that his failure to show cause would result in a recommendation 1
of dismissal of this case. (Id.). The deadline for compliance with the show cause order has passed, and Plaintiff has not responded.
Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to comply with an order of the Court. See N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 41.1 (authorizing dismissal if a "party fails to comply with an applicable rule or a court order"); see also Duong Thanh Ho v. Costello, 757 F. App'x 912, 914-15 (11th Cir. 2018) (affirming dismissal where pro se plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint as directed).
At Pensacola, Florida, this 21st day of May 2025.
Is Zachary C. Bolitho Zachary C. Bolitho United States Magistrate Judge
Notice to the Parties
Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within fourteen days of the date of the Report and Recommendation. Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court's internal use only and does not control. An objecting party must serve a copy of the objections on all other parties. A party who fails to object to the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations contained in a report and recommendation waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court's order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636. 2