COLSON v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
LEE MANUEL COLSON, JR.,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 4:25-cv-85-MW-MJF
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et
al.,
Defendants.
/
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
The undersigned recommends that the District Court dismiss this
civil action without prejudice because Plaintiff failed to comply with two
court orders and failed to make the initial partial filing fee payment
required by federal statute.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff, a federal prisoner, initiated this civil action on February
27, 2025, by filing a letter complaining about the conditions of his
confinement at the Federal Correctional Institution, Tallahassee. Doc. 1.
The clerk of the court docketed Plaintiff’s letter as a complaint. See Docs.
Case 4:25-cv-00085-MW-MJF Document 15 Filed 01/06/26 Page 1 of 4

Page 2 of 4
1, 3. Plaintiff subsequently filed an amended complaint and a motion for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Docs. 6, 7.
On October 15, 2025, the undersigned granted Plaintiff’s motion for
leave to proceed in forma pauperis and ordered Plaintiff to pay an initial
partial 	filing 	fee 	of 	$63.00. 	Doc. 	13. 	The 	undersigned 	imposed 	a
compliance deadline of November 14, 2025, and warned Plaintiff that
failure to comply with the order likely would result in this case being
dismissed. Id.
To date, Plaintiff has not complied with the order dated October 15,
and has not responded to the 14-day show cause order entered on
December 2, 2025, Doc. 14.
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. A district court also may dismiss a civil action
when a plaintiff fails to pay the filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a); Wilson
v. Sargent, 313 F.3d 1315, 1320-21 (11th Cir. 2002).
Case 4:25-cv-00085-MW-MJF Document 15 Filed 01/06/26 Page 2 of 4

Page 3 of 4
Plaintiff has failed to comply with two court orders and has failed
to make the required initial partial filing fee payment or demonstrate his
inability to do so. Plaintiff has offered no excuse for his failures and,
consequently, has not shown good cause. Accordingly, dismissal of this
case is appropriate. See, e.g., Hyde v. Sheriff, Walton Cnty., 2023 WL
5814443 (11th Cir. Sept. 8, 2023) (affirming dismissal of case based on
prisoner-plaintiff’s failure to comply with a court order; prisoner failed to
pay initial partial filing fee despite access to the requisite funds and was
given repeated warnings by the district court that failure to pay could
result in dismissal of the case).
C ONCLUSION
Based 	on 	the 	foregoing, 	the 	undersigned 	respectfully
RECOMMENDS that the District Court:
1. 	DISMISS this civil action without prejudice for Plaintiff’s
failure to comply with court orders.
2. 	DIRECT the clerk of court to close this case file.
At Panama City, Florida, this 6th day of January, 2026.
/s/ Michael J. Frank
Michael J. Frank
United States Magistrate Judge
Case 4:25-cv-00085-MW-MJF Document 15 Filed 01/06/26 Page 3 of 4

Page 4 of 4
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 4:25-cv-00085-MW-MJF Document 15 Filed 01/06/26 Page 4 of 4