United States District Court, D. Minnesota
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
STEVEN E. RAU, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff James Lark filed a complaint seeking relief for alleged violations of his constitutional rights. See ECF No. 1. He did not pay the required filing fee for this case. Instead, Lark filed an application seeking leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"). See ECF No. 2. In an order dated August 19, 2014, this Court declined to grant that IFP application and ordered that Lark file an amended complaint by no later than October 10, 2014, failing which this Court would recommend that this case be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute. See ECF No. 3.
That deadline has now passed, and Lark has not filed an amended complaint. Indeed, Lark has not communicated with the Court about this case since initiating this lawsuit. Accordingly, this Court recommends, in accordance with its prior order, that this action be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. See Henderson v. Renaissance Grand Hotel, 267 Fed.App'x 496, 497 (8th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) ("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.").
Based on the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED THAT:
1. This action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) for ...