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

GERRY RANSON COOKMAN, Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 4:25cv163/TKW/ZCB

OFFICER ADAMS, et al., Defendants. / REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, commenced this action by filing a civil rights complaint under

. (Doc. 1). On April 17, 2025, the Court entered an order directing Plaintiff to file an amended civil rights complaint and pay the filing fee of $405.00 within thirty days. (Doc. 3).1 The Court directed the Clerk of Court to send Plaintiff the complaint form and notified Plaintiff that his failure to comply with an order of the Court would result in a recommendation of dismissal of this case. (Id. at 4). Plaintiff did not respond to the Court’s order by the deadline. Therefore, on May 27, 2025, the Court issued an order giving Plaintiff

1 The Court explained that Plaintiff is a recognized “three-striker” under

(g) and thus may not proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 3 at 2-3). 1 fourteen days to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for his failure to comply with a Court order. (Doc. 4). The Court notified

Plaintiff that his failure to show cause would result in a recommendation of dismissal of this case. (Id.). 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). At Pensacola, Florida, this 18th day of June 2025.

/s/ Zachary C. Bolitho United States Magistrate Judge

2 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;

.

3