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

PRESTON LEWIS, Plaintiff,

vs. Case No.: 3:25cv1265/TKW/ZCB

CITY OF PENSACOLA, et al., Defendants. / REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis in this civil rights action. On August 18, 2025, after performing its screening duties under

(e)(2)(B), the Court struck Plaintiff’s complaint as a shotgun pleading and ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint or notice of voluntary dismissal within fourteen days. (See Doc. 6). That deadline passed on September 2, 2025, but Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or notice of voluntary dismissal and has not otherwise responded.1 Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with

1 Plaintiff was expressly warned that his “failure to comply . . . will result in a recommendation of dismissal.” (Doc. 6 at 10). 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); Britton v. Voyles, No. 5:18-CV-242-TKW/MJF,

, at *2-3 (N.D. Fla. Sept. 1, 2020) (dismissing without prejudice where pro se plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s order to

file an amended complaint or notice of voluntary dismissal), adopted,

(N.D. Fla. Sept. 25, 2020); Logan v. Godwin, No. 22- 14171,

, at *2 (11th Cir. Aug. 28, 2023) (“Ordinarily, a

dismissal without prejudice for failure to comply with a court order is not an abuse of discretion.”) (emphasis in original). At Pensacola, Florida, this 8th day of September 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;