JONES v. DIXON et al

Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
PANAMA CITY DIVISION
TIMOTHY ALLEN JONES,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 5:25-cv-190-TKW-MJF
ADMINISTRATION FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF
CORRECTIONS, et al.,
Defendants.
/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Because Plaintiff failed to comply with two court orders and failed
to prosecute this action, the District Court should dismiss this action
without prejudice.
B ACKGROUND
On August 22, 2025, the undersigned ordered Plaintiff to pay the
filing fee or file a properly completed motion for leave to proceed in forma
pauperis. Doc. 8. The undersigned imposed a compliance deadline of
September 22, 2025.
Plaintiff submitted a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis
that violated the Local Rules. On October 1, 2025, the undersigned
Case 5:25-cv-00190-TKW-MJF Document 11 Filed 12/02/25 Page 1 of 4

Page 2 of 4
instructed Plaintiff to correct this defect and resubmit the motion. The
undersigned provided Plaintiff until October 16, 2025, to file a corrected
motion. Doc. 9. 	The undersigned warned Plaintiff that the failure to
comply with the order likely would result in dismissal of this action.
On November 5, 2025, the undersigned ordered Plaintiff to show
cause for his failure to comply with the undersigned’s order of October 1,
2025. Doc. 10. The undersigned imposed a deadline November 19, 2025,
to comply and again warned Plaintiff that the failure to comply with the
order likely would result in dismissal of this action. As of the date of this
report and recommendation, Plaintiff has not complied with that order.
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.R.
Co., 370 U.S. 626, 632 (1962). Plaintiff has failed to comply with two court
Case 5:25-cv-00190-TKW-MJF Document 11 Filed 12/02/25 Page 2 of 4

Page 3 of 4
orders. Plaintiff has offered no excuse for his failures and, consequently,
has not shown good cause. Accordingly, dismissal of this civil action is
appropriate.
CONCLUSION
Because Plaintiff failed to comply with court orders and failed to
prosecute this action the undersigned respectfully RECOMMENDS that
the District Court:
1. 	DISMISS this action without prejudice.
2. 	DIRECT the clerk of the court to close the case file.
At Pensacola, Florida, this 2nd day of December, 2025.
/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 	address 	preliminary 	matters 	and to 	make
recommendations regarding dispositive matters. See
N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 72.2; see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B),
(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). 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 and does not control. An objecting
party must serve a copy of the objections on all other
parties. A party who fails to object to the magistrate
Case 5:25-cv-00190-TKW-MJF Document 11 Filed 12/02/25 Page 3 of 4

Page 4 of 4
judge’s findings or recommendations contained in a
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-00190-TKW-MJF Document 11 Filed 12/02/25 Page 4 of 4