UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION

JONTRELL JACKSON,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:24cv615-LC-HTC

SGT. MOORE, et al.,

Defendants. __________________________________/ REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Jontrell Jackson, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a complaint under

relating to his imprisonment at Santa Rosa Correctional Institution. Jackson did not use the Court’s required form, pay the fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis and so was directed to file an amended complaint on the proper form and either pay the filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis on the proper form by January 1, 2025. Doc. 3. Jackson failed to do so, so on January 7, 2025, the Court ordered Jackson to show cause by January 21, 2025, why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and to comply with orders of the Court. Doc. 4. Jackson has not responded to the January 7 Order. Based on the foregoing, dismissal of this case is appropriate. See 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); 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). Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED: 1. That this case be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for Plaintiff’s

failure to prosecute and failure to comply with Court orders. 2. That the clerk be directed to close the file. At Pensacola, Florida, this 28th day of January, 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.