UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA GAINESVILLE DIVISION

KEVIN BURNS, Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:25cv29/MW/ZCB

STANLEY GRIFFIS, et al., Defendants. / REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, commenced this action by filing a complaint. (Doc. 1). He later filed two amended complaints. (Docs. 10, 11). The Court performed its screening duty under

(e)(2)(B) and determined that these pleadings failed to state a plausible claim for relief. (See Doc. 14). Accordingly, on March 21, 2025, Plaintiff was ordered to file an amended complaint that stated a claim within fourteen days. (Id. at 16). Plaintiff did not file an amended complaint by the deadline. Therefore, on April 7, 2025, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause, within fourteen days, why this case should not be dismissed for failure to

comply with a Court order. (Doc. 15). The Court notified Plaintiff that his failure to show cause would result in a recommendation of dismissal of this case. (Id. at 1). The deadline for compliance with the show cause

order has passed, and Plaintiff has not responded. Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with

an order of the Court. See N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 41.1 (authorizing dismissal if a “party fails to comply with an applicable rule or a court order”); see also Duong Thanh Ho v. Costello,

, 914-15 (11th Cir.

2018) (affirming dismissal where pro se plaintiff failed to file an amended complaint as directed); Brett v. Biden, No. 1:24-CV-205-MW-MAF,

, at *1 (N.D. Fla. Jan. 2, 2025) (dismissing for failure to

comply with order to file amended complaint), adopted,

(N.D. Fla. Jan. 30, 2025). At Pensacola, Florida, this 22nd day of April 2025.

/s/ Zachary C. Bolitho United States Magistrate Judge

Notice to the Parties

Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within fourteen 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 the objections on 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 unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1;

.