“The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)] for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”
How later courts described this case
- “The court may dismiss an action sua sponte under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)] for failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”
- “[D]ismissal upon disregard of an order, especially where the litigant has been forewarned, generally is not an abuse of discretion.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PENSACOLA DIVISION
ANTONIO MCNEAL,
Plaintiff,
v. Case No. 3:24cv460-MW-HTC
ESCAMBIA COUNTY JAIL,
Defendant.
________________________/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On December 3, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiff Antonio McNeal’s motion
to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered him to pay an initial partial filing fee of
$11.07 by December 24, 2024.1 Doc. 9. After McNeal failed to comply with the
December 3 Order within the allotted time, the Court issued an order on January 3,
2025, giving him fourteen days to show cause why this case should not be dismissed
due to his failure to submit the initial partial filing fee. Doc. 11. McNeal filed a
response to the January 3 Order, asserting he had “undergone financial changes” and
lacked the funds to pay the $11.07 initial partial filing fee; he asked the Court to
waive the initial partial filing fee or extend the time for him to pay it. Doc. 12.
1 The Court assessed the $11.07 fee based on the financial certificate McNeal submitted, which
showed the average of the monthly deposits into his account for the preceding six months was
$55.33. Doc. 8.
On January 16, 2025, the Court advised McNeal it would not excuse him from
the requirement that he pay the $11.07 initial partial filing fee unless he submitted
an updated inmate account statement within fourteen days that confirmed he did not
have the funds to pay the fee and had not received deposits into his account which
he opted to spend on other things. Doc. 13. The January 16 Order warned McNeal
that if he failed to either pay the $11.07 initial partial filing fee or submit the updated
inmate account statement within the allotted time, this case would be dismissed due
to his failure to comply with Court orders. Nevertheless, McNeal has neither paid
the fee nor submitted the account statement. Based on the foregoing, dismissal of
this case is appropriate. See Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 837 (11th Cir. 1989)
(“[D]ismissal upon disregard of an order, especially where the litigant has been
forewarned, generally is not an abuse of discretion.”) (citations omitted); Brown v.
Tallahassee Police Dep’t, 205 F. App’x 802, 802 (11th Cir. 2006) (“The court may
dismiss an action sua sponte under [Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b)] for
failure to prosecute or failure to obey a court order.”) (citations omitted).
Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED:
1. That this case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE due to
McNeal’s failure to comply with Court orders.
2. That the clerk close the file.
At Pensacola, Florida, this 10th day of February, 2025.
/s/ Hope Thai Cannon
HOPE THAI CANNON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within
fourteen (14) 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 its objections upon
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 the unobjected-to factual and
legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1.