United States District Court, D. Minnesota
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
STEVEN E. RAU, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff Schaaron Martin filed a complaint seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See ECF No. 1. She did not pay the required filing fee for this case. Instead, Martin sought leave to proceed in forma pauperis ("IFP"). See ECF No. 2. In an order dated November 4, 2014, this Court noted that Martin's complaint suffered from several infirmities, and it ordered Martin to file an amended complaint that stated a viable claim on which relief can be granted. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). Martin was given until November 21, 2014 to file the amended complaint.
That deadline has now passed, and Martin has not filed an amended complaint. Indeed, Martin has not communicated with the Court since the Court's November 4 order. Accordingly, this Court now 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 upon 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 failure to prosecute.
2. Plaintiff Schaaron Martin's application to proceed in forma pauperis [ECF No. ...