Robertson v. Davis

• Court: District Court, E.D. Arkansas
• Decided: September 10, 2024
• Docket: 4:23-cv-00494
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS CENTRAL DIVISION

BOBBY LEE ROBERTSON PLAINTIFF

v. No: 4:23-cv-00494-KGB-PSH

DONNA DAVIS, et al. DEFENDANTS

PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION INSTRUCTIONS The following Recommendation has been sent to Chief United States District Judge Kristine G. Baker. You may file written objections to all or part of this Recommendation. If you do so, those objections must: (1) specifically explain the factual and/or legal basis for your objection; and (2) be received by the Clerk of this Court within fourteen (14) days of this Recommendation. By not objecting, you may waive the right to appeal questions of fact. DISPOSITION

Plaintiff Bobby Lee Robertson filed a pro se complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on May 26, 2023, while incarcerated at the Arkansas Division of Correction’s Cummins Unit (Doc. No. 2). On September 28, 2023, the Court recommended that Robertson’s First and Eighth Amendment claims against Lieutenant Shalia McDowell, Corporal Lee, and Sergeant Gill in their individual capacities proceed and that his other claims be dismissed (Doc. No. 5). That recommendation remains pending.1

On July 31, 2024, Robertson notified the Court that he had a new free-world address (Doc. No. 21). The next day, the Court ordered Robertson to submit the $350.00 filing fee, or to complete, sign, and file an IFP application reflecting his

free-world financial status within 30 days (Doc. No. 22). Robertson was cautioned that failure to comply with the Court’s order within that time would result in the recommended dismissal of his case. Id. More than 30 days have passed, and Robertson has not complied or otherwise

responded to the July 31 order. He has not submitted a current IFP application or paid the requiring filing fee.2 Accordingly, the Court finds that this action should be dismissed without prejudice for failure to comply with Local Rule 5.5(c)(2) and

failure to respond to the Court’s orders. See Miller v. Benson, 51 F.3d 166, 168 (8th Cir. 1995) (District courts have inherent power to dismiss sua sponte a case for failure to prosecute, and exercise of that power is reviewed for abuse of discretion).

1 The Court appointed William R. Pointer, II for the limited purpose of obtaining service on defendant Corporal Lee on April 1, 2024 (Doc. No. 20). Pointer is hereby relieved as counsel in this matter.

2 As of September 10, 2024, the Court has received no funds towards the filing fee in this case. It is therefore recommended that Robertson’s complaint (Doc. No. 2) be dismissed without prejudice and all pending recommendations and motions be declined as moot. DATED this 10" day of September, 2024.

UNITED STATES Af E JUDGE