UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

SHREVEPORT DIVISION

LEMERITT CHRISTOPHER CIVIL ACTION NO. 24-1740-P

VERSUS JUDGE HICKS

TERRANCE HAULCY, ET AL. MAGISTRATE JUDGE HORNSBY

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION In accordance with the standing order of this court, this matter was referred to the undersigned Magistrate Judge for review, report and recommendation. STATEMENT OF CLAIM Before the court is a civil rights complaint filed in forma pauperis by pro se plaintiff Lemeritt Christopher (“Plaintiff”), pursuant to

. This complaint was received and filed in this court on December 12, 2024. Plaintiff was incarcerated at the David Wade Correctional Center in Homer, Louisiana, when he filed this complaint. He names Terrance Haulcy, Sgt. Walker, and Sgt. Harris as defendants. On December 19, 2024, this court found that Plaintiff’s suit was not in proper form and ordered Plaintiff to amend the pleadings within thirty days of the date of the order [Doc. 3]. However, that order was returned to this court on January 3, 2025, by the United States Postal Service marked “RETURN TO SENDER NOT DELIEVERABLE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TO FORWARD-NO INMATE IDENTIY NUMBER.” Plaintiff failed to provide this court with his inmate identity number [Doc. 1, p. 13]. Accordingly; IT IS RECOMMENDED that this complaint be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE, sua sponte, for failure to prosecute, pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as interpreted by the court and under the court's inherent power

to control its own docket. See Link v. Wabash Railroad Company,

,

(1962); Rogers v. Kroger Company,

(5th Cir. 1982). OBJECTIONS Under the provisions of

(b)(1)(C) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), parties aggrieved by this recommendation have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report and

Recommendation to file specific, written objections with the Clerk of Court unless an extension of time is granted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b). A party may respond to another party’s objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Counsel are directed to furnish a courtesy copy of any objections or responses to the District Judge at the time of filing.

A party’s failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions and recommendation set forth above, within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy shall bar that party, except upon grounds of plain error, from attacking on appeal the proposed factual findings and legal conclusions that were accepted by the district court and that were not objected to by the aforementioned party. See Douglas v. U.S.A.A.,

(5th Cir. 1996) (en banc).

Page 2 of 3 THUS DONE AND SIGNED, in chambers, at Shreveport, Louisiana, on this 25th day of March 2025.

Mark L. Hornsby U.S. Magistrate Judge

Page 3 of 3