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

LONNIE JOHNSON, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CASE NO. 3:22-CV-700-ECM-KFP ) THE TAG OFFICE a/k/a MACON ) COUNTY PROBATE JUDGE ) ) Defendant. )

RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court previously issued an Order requiring Plaintiff to file an amended complaint by May 25, 2023. Doc. 5. The Court provided Plaintiff specific instructions as to filing the amended complaint and warned Plaintiff that a failure to comply with the Court’s Order would result in a recommendation of dismissal. Id. To date, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint. This failure reflects a lack of interest in prosecuting this case, and this case cannot proceed without Plaintiff’s participation. The authority to impose sanctions for failure to prosecute or obey an order is longstanding and acknowledged by Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,

, 629–30 (1962); Moon v. Newsome,

(11th Cir. 1989) (stating that dismissal for failure to obey a court order is generally not an abuse of discretion where litigant has been forewarned). This authority empowers the courts “to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.”

at 630–31; Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-Op of Fla.,

, 102 (11th Cir. 1989) (holding that “[t]he district court possesses the inherent power to police its docket.”). “The sanctions imposed [upon dilatory litigants] can range from a simple reprimand to an order dismissing the action with or without prejudice.” Mingo, 864 F.2d

at 102. Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice. Further, it is ORDERED that by June 14, 2023, the parties may file objections to this Recommendation. The parties must specifically identify the factual findings and legal

conclusions in the Recommendation to which objection is made. Frivolous, conclusive, or general objections will not be considered by the Court. The parties are advised that this Recommendation is not a final order and, therefore, is not appealable. Failure to file written objections to the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations in accordance with

(b)(1) will bar a party from a de novo

determination by the District Court of legal and factual issues covered in the Recommendation and waive the right of the party to challenge on appeal the District Court’s order based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions accepted or adopted by the District Court except on grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. See 11TH CIR. R. 3-1.

DONE this 31st day of May, 2023.

/s/ Kelly Fitzgerald Pate KELLY FITZGERALD PATE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE