Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Kruchten v. Sherburne Health and Human Services Department

United States District Court, D. Minnesota

July 16, 2014

Bryan Joseph Kruchten, Plaintiff,
v.
Sherburne Health and Human Services Department and County of Sherburne, Minnesota, Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

JEANNE J. GRAHAM, Magistrate Judge.

The above-captioned case is before the Court on Plaintiff Bryan Joseph Kruchten's self-styled civil complaint (ECF No. 1). Plaintiff did not tender any filing fee with his pleading, but instead filed an application seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) (ECF No. 2). The matter has been referred to this Court for a report and recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636 and Local Rule 72.1. For the reasons discussed below, it is recommended that the IFP application be denied and that the action be summarily dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).

Plaintiff filed his complaint and IFP application on May 28, 2014. (ECF Nos. 1 & 2.) This Court previously recognized that Plaintiff's complaint alleges that his commitment violates the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. (Order, May 30, 2014, ECF No. 3.) On May 30, 2014, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file the following before June 30, 2014: (1) "a memorandum showing cause, if any, why the prosecution of this action is not barred by the Younger abstention doctrine, " and (2) "an entirely new amended complaint that omits any claims challenging the legality of his confinement or casting doubt on the legality of his confinement." ( Id. at 4.) The Court cautioned Plaintiff that if he did not respond to the Order in a timely matter, "he will be deemed to have abandoned this action, and the Court will recommend that the action be summarily dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b)." ( Id. )

To date, Plaintiff has not satisfied either of the requirements from this Court's Order dated May 30, 2014. Therefore, the Court recommends that Plaintiff's action be summarily dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). See Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (recognizing that a federal court has the inherent authority to "manage [its] own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases"); Henderson v. Renaissance Grand Hotel, 267 Fed.Appx. 496, 497 (8th Cir. 2008) ("A district court has discretion to dismiss an action under Rule 41(b) for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute, or to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or any court order.").

Accordingly, based on all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that:

1. Plaintiff's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (ECF No. 2) be DENIED; and
2. This action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.