IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA NORTHERN DIVISION

ELROY J. ADAMS, #269 977, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CASE NO. 2:21-CV-280-WHA-CSC ) [WO] ADOC OFFICER ELIJA M. MCCORD, ) et al., ) ) Defendants. )

RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This pro se

action was filed with the Court on April 12, 2021. On April 13, 2021, the Court directed Plaintiff to file—by April 27, 2021—a copy of his inmate account statement at the facility where he is detained. Doc. 6. The Court cautioned Plaintiff that his failure to comply with the Order of the Court would result in a recommendation this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Doc. 6 at 2. To date, Plaintiff has failed to submit his inmate account statement. A federal district court has the inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute or obey a court order. See, e.g., Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,

, 629– 30 (1962); FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b). The Eleventh Circuit has made clear that “dismissal is warranted only upon a ‘clear record of delay or willful contempt and a finding that lesser sanctions would not suffice.’” Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-Op of Fla.,

, 102 (11th Cir. 1989) (per curiam) (emphasis omitted) (quoting Goforth v. Owens,

(11th Cir. 1985)). Here, the undersigned finds that Plaintiff has willfully failed to file a response in compliance with the Court’s April 13, 2021, Order. And considering Plaintiff’s disregard for orders of this Court, the undersigned further finds sanctions lesser than dismissal would not suffice in this case.

Accordingly, the undersigned Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS this case be DISMISSED without prejudice. The parties may file any objections to the Recommendation on or before July 22, 2021. Any objections filed by a party must specifically identify the factual findings and legal conclusions in the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation to which objection is made.

Frivolous, conclusive or general objections will not be considered by the District Court. This Recommendation is not a final order and, therefore it is not appealable. Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations in the Magistrate Judge’s report shall bar a party from a de novo determination by the District Court of factual findings and legal issues covered in the report and shall “waive the right to challenge on

appeal the district court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions” except upon grounds of plain error if necessary in the interests of justice. 11TH Cir. R. 3- 1; see Resolution Trust Co. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc.,

(11th Cir. 1993); Henley v. Johnson,

(11th Cir. 1989). Done, this 8th day of July 2021.

/s/ Charles S. Coody CHARLES S. COODY UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE