Jackson v. TD Industries, No. 3:2020cv01349 - Document 9 (N.D. Tex. 2020)

Court Description: Order Accepting 8 Findings and Recommendations. The court certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. (Ordered by Judge Sam A. Lindsay on 9/22/2020) (svc)

Download PDF
Jackson v. TD Industries Doc. 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION RONALD JACKSON, Plaintiff, v. TD INDUSTRIES, Defendant. § § § § § § § § § Civil Action No. 3:20-CV-1349-L-BN ORDER The Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”) (Doc. 8) was entered on August 27, 2020, recommending that the court “dismiss this action without prejudice under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 41(b) and without prejudice to Plaintiff Ronald Jackson’s filing a motion to reopen this case on or before 30 days from the date of any order accepting or adopting these findings, conclusions, and recommendation” as a result of Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute and comply with a court order. Report 5. No objections to the Report were filed. Having reviewed the pleadings, file, and record in this case, and the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge, the court determines that the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge are correct, and accepts them as those of the court. Accordingly, the court dismisses this action without prejudice pursuant to Rule for failure to prosecute and comply with a court order. Any request for postjudgment relief in this action must comply with the district’s local civil rules and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Order –Page 1 Dockets.Justia.com The court prospectively certifies that any appeal of this action would not be taken in good faith. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3); Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(3). In support of this certification, the court incorporates by reference the Report. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 & n.21 (5th Cir. 1997). The court concludes that any appeal of this action would present no legal point of arguable merit and would, therefore, be frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983). In the event of an appeal, Plaintiff may challenge this certification by filing a separate motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal with the clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. See Baugh, 117 F.3d at 202; Fed. R. App. P. 24(a)(5). It is so ordered this 22nd day of September, 2020. _________________________________ Sam A. Lindsay United States District Judge Order –Page 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.