PALMER v. NUCKOLS

Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION
KERIEKAN J. PALMER,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 5:25-cv-348-AW-MJF
CHRISTOPHER NUCKOLS,
Defendant.
/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The undersigned recommends that this case be dismissed because
Plaintiff failed to comply with two court orders and applicable court rules,
failed to pay the filing fee, and appears to have abandoned this civil
action.
B ACKGROUND
Plaintiff commenced this civil action on December 8, 2025, by filing
a pro se civil-rights complaint and an application for leave to proceed in
forma pauperis (“IFP”). Docs. 1, 2. At the time, Plaintiff was a Florida
state prisoner confined at the Apalachee Correctional Institution in
Sneads, Florida. Id.
Case 5:25-cv-00348-AW-MJF Document 9 Filed 02/10/26 Page 1 of 4

Page 2 of 4
Plaintiff’s complaint and IFP application failed to comply with the
Local Rules for the United States District Court for the Northern District
of Florida, and also failed to comply with the IFP statute. Accordingly, on
December 	17, 	2025, 	the 	undersigned 	instructed 	Plaintiff 	of 	the
deficiencies and ordered Plaintiff to: (1) file an amended complaint and
(2) pay the $405.00 filing fee or file a new and complete application for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Doc. 4 (outlining deficiencies and
instructing Plaintiff how to correct them) (citing N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 5.3 &
5.7; 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2)). The undersigned imposed a compliance
deadline of January 16, 2026, and warned Plaintiff that failure to comply
with the order likely would result in this case being dismissed. Id. at 5.
To date, Plaintiff has not complied with the order dated December
17, 2025 and has not responded to the show-cause order dated January
20, 2026. Doc. 6.1
1 Copies of orders and other correspondence from this court have been
mailed to Plaintiff but returned as undeliverable. Docs. 5, 7, 8. The
Florida 	Department 	of 	Corrections 	Offender 	Network 	reflects 	that
Plaintiff was released from FDC custody on December 16, 2025. The
Offender 	Network 	does 	not 	provide 	a 	release 	address 	for 	Plaintiff.
Plaintiff has not notified the clerk of the court of his current address.
Case 5:25-cv-00348-AW-MJF Document 9 Filed 02/10/26 Page 2 of 4

Page 3 of 4
D ISCUSSION
“Federal courts possess an inherent power to dismiss a complaint
for failure to comply with a court order.” Foudy v. Indian River Cnty.
Sheriff’s Off., 845 F.3d 1117, 1126 (11th Cir. 2017) (citations omitted);
N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 41.1 (authorizing the court to dismiss an action, or any
claim within it, “[i]f a party fails to comply with an applicable rule or a
court order”). A district court also may dismiss a civil action sua sponte
for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R. Co.,
370 U.S. 626, 632 (1962). Furthermore, a district court may dismiss a
civil action when a plaintiff fails to pay the filing fee or demonstrate that
he qualifies to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); N.D.
Fla. Loc. R. 5.3; Wilson v. Sargent, 313 F.3d 1315, 1320–21 (11th Cir.
2002).
Plaintiff has failed to comply with two court orders and applicable
rules for the Northern District of Florida, failed to pay the filing fee, and
appears to have abandoned this action. Plaintiff has offered no excuse for
his failures and, consequently, has not shown good cause. Accordingly,
dismissal of this action is appropriate.
Case 5:25-cv-00348-AW-MJF Document 9 Filed 02/10/26 Page 3 of 4

Page 4 of 4
C ONCLUSION
For 	the 	reasons 	set 	forth 	above, 	the 	undersigned 	respectfully
RECOMMENDS that the District Court:
1. 	DISMISS this civil action without prejudice.
2. 	DIRECT the clerk of court to close this case file.
At Panama City, Florida, this 10th day of February, 2026.
/s/ Michael J. Frank
Michael J. Frank
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
The District Court referred this case to a magistrate
judge to make recommendations regarding dispositive
matters. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), (C). Objections to
these proposed findings and recommendations must be
filed within fourteen days of the date of the report and
recommendation. 	Any 	different 	deadline 	that 	may
appear 	on 	the 	electronic 	docket 	is 	for 	the 	court’s
internal use only. A party must serve a copy of any
objections on all other parties. A party who fails to
object to this report and recommendation waives the
right to challenge on appeal the District Court’s order
based on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions.
See 11th Cir. R. 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.
Case 5:25-cv-00348-AW-MJF Document 9 Filed 02/10/26 Page 4 of 4