IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

LAKEISHA YOUNG, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) Civil Action No. 19-00564-KD-MU ) MIDWEST RECOVERY SYSTEM, LLC, ) ) Defendant. )

ORDER This action is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation wherein the Magistrate Judge recommended granting Defendant Midwest Recovery System, LLC’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff Lakeisha Young’s complaint for failure to “comply with Rules 8 and 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure” (doc. 9, p. 1). The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal without prejudice to Young’s “ability to amend her complaint (by a date certain) to state a claim (or claims) for relief against” Midwest. (Id.) (parenthetical phrases in original). Young did not file an objection to the Report and Recommendation. The Court adopted the Report and Recommendation in part. The Court adopted the Magistrate Judge’s opinion as to the insufficiency of Young’s complaint. However, the Court denied Defendant Midwest's motion to dismiss and granted Young leave to file an amended complaint that would cure the deficiencies and comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court also advised Young that failure to file a conforming amended complaint, would result in dismissal of this action. Young was ordered to file her amended complaint on or before January 30, 2020. (Doc. 10). To date, Young has not filed an amended complaint as ordered. The record is clear that Young has failed to comply with the orders of this Court and the federal rules governing the filing of complaints. Importantly, despite the warning that her case would be dismissed, Young failed to take advantage of the opportunity to file an amended complaint. See Jackson v. Bank of America, NA,

(11th Cir. 2018) (“In dismissing a shogun complaint for noncompliance with Rule 8(a), a district court must give the plaintiff ‘one chance to remedy such deficiencies.’”) (citation omitted). Accordingly, upon consideration of the foregoing, Midwest’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, and

this action is dismissed with prejudice. Bryant v. Dupree,

, 1163 (11th Cir. 2001) (“Generally, ‘[w]here a more carefully drafted complaint might state a claim, a plaintiff must be given at least one chance to amend the complaint before the district court dismisses the action with prejudice.’”) (citation omitted); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (authorizing the involuntary dismissal of an action due to the plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Federal Rules or a court order); Carson v. World Marine of Ala., LLC,

, *1-2 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 30, 2017), Report and Recommendation adopted by

(S.D. Ala. Dec. 19, 2017) (recognizing the court’s authority to enforce its orders and ensure prompt disposition of the actions before the court). DONE and ORDERED this 10th day of February 2020.

s / Kristi K. DuBose KRISTI K. DuBOSE CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE