Daniels v. Tyler Police Department

District Court, E.D. Texas

Daniels v. Tyler Police Department

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS No. 6:23-cv-00343 Randy K. Daniels, Plaintiff, V. Tyler Police Department et al., Defendants.

ORDER On July 10, 2023, plaintiff Randy K. Daniels, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit (Doc. 1) pursuant to

42 U.S.C. § 1983

. The case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b). On July 14, 2023, the magistrate judge instructed plaintiff to, within 30 days, either pay the $402 filing fee or submit an 7m forma pauperis application with a current six-month history of his inmate trust fund account or institutional equivalent. Doc. 3. Plaintiff sub- mitted a motion for leave to proceed im forma pauperis; but he did not include a current six-month history of his inmate trust fund account or institutional equivalent. Doc. 6. Plaintiff asserted that “Admin- istration refused to provide such information.” Doc. 6 at 2. On August 17, 2023, the magistrate judge construed plaintiff’s motion for leave to proceed 7m forma pauperis as a request for an ex- tension of time to submit his current six-month history of his inmate trust fund account or institutional equivalent. Doc. 7. The magistrate judge further stated that the court regularly receives in forma pau- peris data sheets from Smith County Jail inmates and that jail inmates request such information through the jail’s kiosk system. The mag- istrate judge instructed plaintiff to submit a compliant application by September 18, 2023. Doc. 7. No such application was received. On October 23, 2023, the magistrate judge issued a report rec- ommending that plaintiff’s case be dismissed without prejudice for

want of prosecution and failure to obey an order. Doc. 11. No objec- tions have been filed. When no party objects to the magistrate judge’s report and rec- ommendation, the court reviews it only for clear error. See Douglass yp. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n,

79 F.3d 1415, 1420

(5th Cir. 1996) (en banc). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report and being sat- isfied that it contains no clear error, the court accepts the findings and conclusions of the report. Accordingly, the complaint is dis- missed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply with a court order. So ordered by the court on December 20, 2023. fable BARKER United States District Judge

-2-

Reference

Status
Unknown