UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

CRYSTAL LYNN MORRIS, : Case No. 2:24-cv-4223 : Plaintiff, : : District Judge Michael H. Watson vs. : Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman : STATE OF OHIO, et al., : : Defendants. : : REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On December 3, 2024, plaintiff filed a complaint in this Court. (Doc. 1). On January 8, 2024, after plaintiff failed to respond to a Notice of Deficiency (see Doc. 2), the Court issued a Deficiency Order requiring plaintiff sign the complaint and to pay the full filing fee or to submit a complete application and affidavit to proceed in forma pauperis within thirty (30) days. (Doc. 3). Plaintiff was advised that “[i]f plaintiff fails to comply with this Order, the Court shall dismiss this case for want of prosecution.” (Id. at PageID 28). To date, more than thirty (30) days after the January 8, 2025 Deficiency Order, plaintiff has failed to respond to or otherwise comply with the Order. District courts have the inherent power to sua sponte dismiss civil actions for want of prosecution to manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R.,

(1962). See also Jourdan v. Jabe,

(6th Cir. 1991). Failure of a party to respond to an order of the court warrants invocation of the Court’s inherent power. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). It is therefore RECOMMENDED that this matter be DISMISSED for lack of prosecution. NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to this Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after being served with a copy thereof. That period may be extended further by the Court on timely

motion by either side for an extension of time. All objections shall specify the portion(s) of the R&R objected to, and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. A party shall respond to an opponent’s objections within FOURTEEN DAYS after being served with a copy of those objections. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn,

(1985); United States v. Walters,

(6th Cir. 1981).

s/Stephanie K. Bowman Stephanie K. Bowman United States Magistrate Judge

2