UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE

JOHN KENNEDY FRENCH, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) 1:24-cv-00129-JAW ) THOMAS AGENCY, ) ) Defendant )

RECOMMENDED DECISION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT

On April 17, 2024, Plaintiff filed a complaint and an application to proceed without prepayment of fees. (Complaint, ECF No. 1; Motion to Proceed, ECF No. 2.) Because Plaintiff had not provided the required financial information for the Court to rule on Plaintiff’s application, on April 19, 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff to pay the filing fee or file a completed application on or before May 3, 2024. (Order, ECF No. 3.) Through the order, the Court informed Plaintiff that the failure to comply with the order could result in the dismissal of the matter. Because Plaintiff failed to comply with the order, on May 13, 2024, the Court issued an order to show cause. (Order, ECF No. 5.) In the show cause order, the Court established June 3, 2024, as the date by which Plaintiff was to show cause in writing as to why he has not complied with the Court’s order and as to why the matter should not be dismissed. As of the date of this order, Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee, filed a completed application to proceed without prepayment of fees, or otherwise complied with the Court’s order. I, 1 therefore, recommend the Court dismiss the matter. DISCUSSION

“A district court, as part of its inherent power to manage its own docket, may dismiss a case sua sponte for any of the reasons prescribed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).” Cintron- Lorenzo v. Dep’t de Asumtos del Consumidor,

(1st Cir. 2002) (citing Link v. Wabash R.R. Co.,

, 629 – 31 (1962)). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) authorizes the Court to dismiss an action for a party’s failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the Court’s orders.

Here, Plaintiff has failed (a) to comply with the Court’s order that required Plaintiff to pay the filing fee or submit a properly completed application to proceed in forma pauperis, and (b) to show cause for his failure to pay the filing fee or submit a properly completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. Plaintiff thus has not only failed to comply with the Court’s orders, but insofar as he has neither paid the filing fee nor

submitted a complete application to proceed in forma pauperis, Plaintiff has also failed to prosecute his claim. Dismissal, therefore, is warranted. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing analysis, I recommend the Court dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint.

NOTICE

A party may file objections to those specified portions of a magistrate judge’s report or proposed findings or recommended decisions entered pursuant to

(b)(1)(B) for which de novo review by the district 2 court is sought, together with a supporting memorandum, within fourteen (14) days of being served with a copy thereof.

Failure to file a timely objection shall constitute a waiver of the right to de novo review by the district court and to appeal the district court’s order.

/s/ John C. Nivison U.S. Magistrate Judge

Dated this 13th day of June, 2024.

3