United States District Court, S.D. Texas, Houston Division
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
November 30, 2018, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se and in forma
pauperis, filed the present action against the State of
Texas, Rolando Pablos,  Murl E. Miller,  Roland Altinger,
Ronnie Thomas,  Ann Harris Bennett,  “Judiciary
Defendants, ” “Harris County District Clerk,
” “Senate Select Committee on Property Tax
Reform, ” “Texas Judicial Council, ” and
“Harris County Sheriff's Office In Rem
complaint, it appears that Plaintiff makes three claims: (1)
a claim for prospective relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983
“for violation of Federal and State rights to have and
hold property that has been properly ceded from the
Republic/State of Texas through use of a contract;” (2)
a constitutional challenge to Texas Tax Code sec.
11.01(a)-(b); and (3) a “takings” claim under 42
U.S.C. § 1983 for “collecting or attempting to
collect funds in the form of Federal Reserve notes . . . in
violation of 31 U.S.C. section 3124 and violating Texas Tax
code sec. 31.01.”
February 27, 2019, the court found that Plaintiff's
complaint failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure (“Rule”) 8 and ordered Plaintiff to
file an amended complaint that complies with Rule 8 within
fourteen days of his receipt of the order. It has been more
than thirty days since the court's order and Plaintiff
has not amended his complaint or filed any other pleading.
Federal Rules empower a district court to dismiss an action
“[f]or failure of the plaintiff to prosecute or to
comply with these rules or any order of court.”
Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b); see also Larson v. Scott, 157
F.3d 1030, 1031 (5th Cir. 1998). Dismissal for
failure to prosecute may be upon motion of the defendant or
sua sponte. Clewis v. Medco Health Sols., Inc., No.
3:12-CV-5208-L, 2014 WL 840026, at * 3 (N.D. Tex. Mar. 4,
2014), aff'd, 578 Fed.Appx. 469 (5th
Cir. 2014) (unpublished). The court's authority is
derived from the court's power to manage its own docket
“to ensure the orderly and expeditious disposition of
cases.” Berry v. CIGNA/RSI-CIGNA, 975 F.2d
1188, 1191 (5th Cir. 1992)(quoting Link v.
Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962)).
has failed to comply with the court's February 27, 2019,
order and has failed to prosecute his case. Accordingly, the
court RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's
lawsuit be DISMISSED.
Clerk shall send copies of this Memorandum and Recommendation
to the respective parties who have fourteen days from the
receipt thereof to file written objections thereto pursuant
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) and General Order
2002-13. Failure to file written objections within the time
period mentioned shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking
the factual findings and legal conclusions on appeal.
original of any written objections shall be filed with the
United States District Clerk electronically. Copies of such
objections shall be mailed to opposing parties and to the
chambers of the undersigned, 515 Rusk, Suite 7019, Houston,
 Mr. Pablos is denominated as the Texas
Secretary of State. See Doc. 5, Pl.'s Compl. p.
 Mr. Miller is denominated as the
Special Counsel for Litigation in the State Comptroller's
Office. See id.
 Mr. Altinger is denominated as the
Chief Appraiser for the Harris County Appraisal District.
 Mr. Thomas is denominated the Chair of
the Harris County Appraisal Review Board. See
 Ms. Bennet is denominated as the
Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector. See