IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

AUGUSTA DIVISION

JEREMY PEPPERS, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CV 123-109 ) JOHN AND OR JANE DOES, ) ) Defendant. ) _________________________________________________________

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION _________________________________________________________ On July 25, 2023, Plaintiff, an inmate at Augusta State Medical Prison in Grovetown, Georgia, submitted a complaint for filing pursuant to

in the Middle District of Georgia. (Doc. no. 1.) Plaintiff did not submit the appropriate filing fee or a request to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). On August 8, 2023, United States District Judge C. Ashley Royal transferred the case to the Southern District of Georgia. (Doc. nos. 3-5.) Upon receiving the case in the Southern District, the Clerk of Court sent Plaintiff a deficiency notice concerning the need for an IFP motion or payment of the filing fee, as is required by Local Rule 4.1. (See doc. no. 6.) The notice explained failure to correct the deficiency could result in dismissal. (See id.) Plaintiff failed to respond to the Clerk’s deficiency notice. A district court has authority to manage its docket to expeditiously resolve cases, and this authority includes the power to dismiss a case for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with a court order. Equity Lifestyle Props., Inc. v. Fla. Mowing & Landscape Serv., Inc.,

(11th Cir. 2009) (citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b)); see also Eades v. Ala. Dep’t of Human Res.,

(11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (“District courts possess the ability to dismiss a case .. . for want of prosecution based on two possible sources of authority: Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) or their inherent authority to manage their dockets.’’). Moreover, the Local Rules of the Southern District of Georgia dictate that an “assigned Judge may, after notice to counsel of record, sua sponte . . . dismiss any action for want of prosecution, with or without prejudice . . . [for] [willful disobedience or neglect of any order of the Court; or [a]ny other failure to prosecute a civil action with reasonable promptness.” Loc. R. 41.1 (b) & (c). Plaintiff failed to comply with the requirements of the Local Rules when he did not submit a motion to proceed IFP or pay the filing fee, and when given the opportunity to submit the appropriate paperwork, he failed to respond to the Clerk’s deficiency notice. Plaintiffs failure to comply with the requirements of the Local Rules, and his failure to respond to the Clerk’s deficiency notice, amounts not only to a failure to prosecute, but also an abandonment of his case. Accordingly, the Court REPORTS and RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice and that this civil action be CLOSED. Because this case is due to be dismissed, the pending motion to appoint counsel should also be DENIED AS MOOT. (Doc. no. 8.) SO REPORTED and RECOMMENDED this 22nd day of September, 2023, at Augusta, Georgia.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA