Opinion
CV419-003
06-12-2019
IVERSON DAMON LANG, Plaintiff, v. MRS. K. BROWN, et al.., Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Iverson Damon Lang, pro se and in forma pauperis, has filed yet another discovery motion with the Court, virtually identical to one already denied. Compare doc. 46 with doc. 39. Once again, no Certificate of Service is provided to indicate that defendants were actually served with this request as required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (by which even pro se litigants must abide). But Lang clearly does not care that he has failed to comply with his basic obligations as a litigant in this Court, having willfully ignored those requirements until now. See docs. 22 (denying improperly served discovery motion and informing Lang that he must Comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the same as any other litigant); doc. 35 (same); doc. 40 (same); doc. 42 (same); doc. 45 (same).
In fact, he has been warned that his flagrant disregard for the Rules would result in a recommendation that sanctions be imposed. Doc. 45 at 2-3 (providing "Lang's final warning" to abide the service requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules of the Southern District of Georgia, and unambiguously warning him that "[i]f he again flouts this Court's clear orders and the applicable Rules, plaintiff's case will be recommended for dismissal as a sanction for willfully refusing to abide a Court order."). Lang has demonstrated that he cannot manage himself, and the time has come for the Court to manage him.
It is therefore RECOMMENDED that Lang's case be DISMISSED without prejudice for willful refusal to obey a Court order. This Report and Recommendation (R&R) is submitted to the district judge assigned to this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and this Court's Local Rule 72.3. Within 14 days of service, any party may file written objections to this R&R with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations." Any request for additional time to file objections should be filed with the Clerk for consideration by the assigned district judge.
If Lang wishes to file a new 42 U.S.C. § 1983 case, he may do so. In so doing, however, he will be required to submit a new filing fee or application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, will remain subject to the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act, Pub. L. No. 104-134, 110 Stat. 1321 (PLRA), and any new Complaint will thereafter be screened pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, which requires the immediate dismissal of any pro se complaint that fails to state at least one actionable claim. --------
After the objections period has ended, the Clerk shall submit this R&R together with any objections to the assigned district judge. The district judge will review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The parties are advised that failure to timely file objections will result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 11th Cir. R. 3-1; see Symonett v. V.A. Leasing Corp., 648 F. App'x 787, 790 (11th Cir. 2016); Mitchell v. United States, 612 F. App'x 542, 545 (11th Cir. 2015).
SO REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED, this 12th day of June, 2019.
/s/_________
CHRISTOPHER L. RAY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA