ORDER AND REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CHRISTOPHER L. RAY, Magistrate Judge.

Petitioner has again requested that this Court extend the time for him to file an amended motion to vacate his sentence. Doc. 10. He claims that he is experiencing difficulty accessing certain personal property, including photographs of his son, but does not indicate why this personal property is necessary to amend his petition. Id. Petitioner has received numerous extensions in this case and yet he has still failed to comply with the Court's directive to amend his petition. Doc. 5, doc. 6, doc. 9. No extension here is warranted, accordingly, the motion is DENIED. Because petitioner has failed to comply with the October 9, 2019, deadline for amending his petition, this case should be dismissed without prejudice. Doc. 9 (Order directing petitioner to supplement and indicating there would be no further extensions.) This Court has the authority to prune cases from its dockets where parties have failed to comply with its Orders. See L.R. 41(b); see Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962) (courts have the inherent authority to dismiss claims for lack of prosecution); Mingo v. Sugar Cane Growers Co-op, 864 F.2d 101, 102 (11th Cir. 1989); Jones v. Graham, 709 F.2d 1457, 1458 (11th Cir. 1983); Floyd v. United States, CV491-277 (S.D. Ga. June 10, 1992). Plaintiff's case should thus be DISMISSED without prejudice for failing to comply with the Court's Order.

For the reasons set forth above, petitioner raises no substantial claim of deprivation of a constitutional right. Accordingly, no certificate of appealability should issue. 28 U.S.C. § 2253; Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Habeas Corpus Cases Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 ("The district court must issue or deny a certificate of appealability when it enters a final order adverse to the applicant."). Any motion for leave to appeal in forma pauperis therefore is moot.

This Report and Recommendation (R&R) is submitted to the district judge assigned to this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and this Court's Local Rule 72.3. Within 14 days of service, any party may file written objections to this R&R with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. The document should be captioned "Objections to Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations." Any request for additional time to file objections should be filed with the Clerk for consideration by the assigned district judge.

After the objections period has ended, the Clerk shall submit this R&R together with any objections to the assigned district judge. The district judge will review the magistrate judge's findings and recommendations pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The parties are advised that failure to timely file objections will result in the waiver of rights on appeal. 11th Cir. R. 3-1; see Symonett v. V.A. Leasing Corp., 648 F. App'x 787, 790 (11th Cir. 2016); Mitchell v. United States, 612 F. App'x 542, 545 (11th Cir. 2015).

SO ORDERED AND REPORTED AND RECOMMENDED.