Rodriguez-Canas v. Warden, Noble Correctional Institution

2:25-cv-01246Ohsd26.02.2026

Gesamter Gesetzestext

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION
JOSE S. RODRIGUEZ-CANAS,
Petitioner,
Case No. 2:25-cv-1246
v.
Judge Michael H. Watson
WARDEN, Noble Correctional
Institution, 	Magistrate Judge Caroline H. Gentry
Respondent.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Petitioner, an inmate in state custody at the Noble Correctional Center, has filed a petition
for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. For the following reasons, the
undersigned Magistrate Judge RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED without
prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Petitioner failed to pay the $5 filing fee or file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis
(“IFP application”). As a result, the undersigned issued a Deficiency Order on November 3,
2025, giving Petitioner 30 days to remedy that deficiency. (Doc. 2). In response, Petitioner filed
a “Notice of Payment” on December 3, 2025, with an attached receipt indicating that he had
requested $5 from the prison cashier for a habeas filing fee. (Doc. 3). But on January 2, 2026,
when it was evident that the Court had not received the filing fee, the undersigned issued another
Deficiency Order giving Petitioner 30 days to pay the $5 filing fee or submit a completed IFP
application. (Doc. 4). To date, almost two months have passed since that second Deficiency
Order was issued, and Petitioner has not paid the fee or submitted an IFP application.
Case: 2:25-cv-01246-MHW-MRM Doc #: 5 Filed: 02/26/26 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>
2
“Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) recognizes the power of the district court to enter a sua sponte
order of dismissal.” Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 109 (6th Cir. 1991) (citing Link v. Wabash
R..Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962); Carter v. Memphis, 636 F.2d 159, 161 (6th Cir. 1980)).
This authority is considered an “inherent power” necessary for “courts to manage their affairs so
as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link, 370 U.S. at 630-31.
Failure of a party to respond to an order of the Court warrants invocation of the Court’s inherent
power. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Accordingly, this case should be dismissed for Petitioner’s
failure to comply with the Court’s orders directing Petitioner to remedy deficiencies in his
filings.
The undersigned therefore RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without
prejudice for want of prosecution.
IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.
February 26, 2026 	/s/ Caroline H. Gentry
Date 	CAROLINE H. GENTRY
United States Magistrate Judge
PROCEDURE ON OBJECTIONS
If any party objects to this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen
days of the date of this Report, file and serve on all parties written objections to those specific
proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made, together with supporting
authority for the objection(s). A judge of this Court shall make a de novo determination of those
portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is
made. Upon proper objections, a judge of this Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in
Case: 2:25-cv-01246-MHW-MRM Doc #: 5 Filed: 02/26/26 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>
3
part, the findings or recommendations made herein, may receive further evidence, or may
recommit this matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(B)(1).
The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and
Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to have the district judge review the Report
and Recommendation de novo and operates as a waiver of the right to appeal the decision of the
District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140
(1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). The parties are further advised
that, if they intend to file an appeal of any adverse decision, they may submit arguments in any
objections filed, regarding whether a certificate of appealability should issue.
Case: 2:25-cv-01246-MHW-MRM Doc #: 5 Filed: 02/26/26 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

Setzen Sie Ihre Recherche in ChatGPT oder Claude fort

Verbinden Sie Omnilex, um den Rechtskorpus über Ihren KI-Assistenten zu durchsuchen.