UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION

TAMMY BELINDA GODMAN,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:24cv346-TKW-HTC

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant. _____________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION On July 25, 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff Tammy Belinda Godman to, within twenty-one days: (1) pay the remaining balance of the $405 filing fee ($353) or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis; and (2) file a complaint which complies with Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 and establishes the jurisdiction of this Court to hear her claims. Doc. 3. The Court also advised Godman that her failure to comply with the July 25 Order would result in the recommendation that this case be dismissed. After Godman failed to comply with the July 25 Order within the allotted time, the Court ordered her on August 22, 2024, to show cause within fourteen days why this case should not be dismissed due to her failure to comply with the July 25 Order. Doc. 4. To date, Godman has not responded to the August 22 Order or complied with the July 25 Order. Based on the foregoing, dismissal of this case is appropriate. See Brown v. Tallahassee Police Dep’t,

(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); Moon v. Newsome,

(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).

Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED: 1. That this case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE due to Godman’s failure to prosecute and failure to comply with Court orders. 2. That the clerk close the file.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 11th day of September, 2024. /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.