UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PEORIA DIVISION
July 15, 2010
DEMARCUS RIDDLE, PLAINTIFF,
CITY OF PEORIA POLICE OFFICER FAW, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Joe Billy McDADE United States Senior District Judge
ORDER & OPINION
This matter is before the Court on a Report & Recommendation ("R&R") from Magistrate Judge Byron Cudmore, recommending that this matter be dismissed for failure to prosecute as Plaintiff has not paid his filing fee by the June 10, 2010 deadline. (Doc. 3).
Plaintiff filed his Complaint pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1983 against Officer Faw, the City of Peoria, and the Peoria Police Department on April 27, 2010, alleging that Officer Faw, due to a lack of training, shot him in the back without any prior warning. (Doc. 1). Concurrently with this Complaint, Petitioner filed a Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 20). On that same date, Magistrate Judge Cudmore, noting that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis lacked necessary information, ordered Plaintiff to provide the missing information by May 10, 2010. (4/27/10 Text Order). On May 6, 2010, the Clerk filed the additional information submitted by Plaintiff, and Magistrate Judge Cudmore determined that Plaintiff was capable of paying the filing fee and so denied the Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis; he set a deadline of June 10, 2010 for payment of the filing fee, and warned that failure to timely pay the filing fee could result in dismissal of the case. (5/6/10 Text Order). As of June 17, 2010, Plaintiff had not paid the filing fee, and so Magistrate Judge Cudmore issued the instant R&R, recommending dismissal of Plaintiff's action. (Doc. 3).
In the June 17, 2010 R&R, Magistrate Judge Cudmore warned Plaintiff that failure to object to it by July 6, 2010 would result in a waiver of objections to the R&R. (Doc. 3). As no timely objections to the R&R were filed, Plaintiff has waived any objections to it. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd., 797 F.2d 538, 539 (7th Cir. 1986). The Court finds that dismissal is appropriate, as Plaintiff has failed to pay his filing fee, despite being instructed to do so after the denial of his Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Cudmore's Report & Recommendation (Doc. 3) is hereby ADOPTED. This matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to pay the filing fee.
Entered this 15th day of July, 2010.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.