Helms v. Macy's Retail Holding, Inc., CV 418-103. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20190513974
Visitors: 20
Filed: May 10, 2019
Latest Update: May 10, 2019
Summary: ORDER CHRISTOPHER L. RAY , Magistrate Judge . The parties filed their notice of settlement on February 22, 2019, indicating that they would file a stipulated dismissal within 60 days, "depending on the ability to resolve an issue regarding a claimed Medicare lien." Doc. 22. There has been no further activity in this case. It is therefore unclear whether the parties have resolved their dispute, or intend to proceed with the case. Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, the parties
Summary: ORDER CHRISTOPHER L. RAY , Magistrate Judge . The parties filed their notice of settlement on February 22, 2019, indicating that they would file a stipulated dismissal within 60 days, "depending on the ability to resolve an issue regarding a claimed Medicare lien." Doc. 22. There has been no further activity in this case. It is therefore unclear whether the parties have resolved their dispute, or intend to proceed with the case. Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, the parties ..
More
ORDER
CHRISTOPHER L. RAY, Magistrate Judge.
The parties filed their notice of settlement on February 22, 2019, indicating that they would file a stipulated dismissal within 60 days, "depending on the ability to resolve an issue regarding a claimed Medicare lien." Doc. 22. There has been no further activity in this case. It is therefore unclear whether the parties have resolved their dispute, or intend to proceed with the case.
Within 14 days of the date this Order is served, the parties shall either (1) file their stipulation of dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, or (2) otherwise apprise the Court of the status of their settlement. Failure to respond will result in a recommendation of dismissal. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (authorizing district courts to dismiss an action for failure to obey a court order); L.R. 41.1(c) (authorizing district court to dismiss for lack of prosecution); 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); Collins v. Lake Helen, L.P., 249 F. App'x 116, 120 (11th Cir. 2007) ("[D]istrict court[s] possesses the inherent power to police [their] docket[s]" and to prune out those cases left to languish by their litigants).
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
