Report and Recommendation Regarding Claims By and Against Defendant Graywood Consulting Group, Inc.

DEBRA McVICKER LYNCH, Magistrate Judge.

On May 8, 2015, the court issued its order (Dkt. 33) requiring defendant and counterclaimant Graywood Consulting Group, Inc. to show cause (1) why default should not be entered against it on the plaintiff's complaint because it is not represented by counsel and (2) why its counterclaim should not be dismissed with prejudice because it is not represented by counsel and because of its failure to prosecute, under Local Rule 41-1. Graywood Consulting did not respond to the court's show cause order. The court's order was mailed to the address for Graywood Consulting that was supplied to the court by its principal, defendant Vaughn Scott Burch, and to which entries were mailed (and not returned) in February and June 2014. (See, e.g., Dkt. 23, Dkt, 25, Dkt. 26). The court's later orders to Graywood Consulting, including the May 8 order to show cause, were returned by the post office with a notice that Graywood has moved and left no forwarding address. Graywood was responsible for notifying the court of changes to its address for receiving orders or other notifications from the court or parties. Graywood's failure to alert the court to an address change and any lack of notice of court orders because the court does not have an accurate address did not excuse Graywood from responding to the court's show cause order. Moreover, the court's order was available to Graywood Consulting through PACER.

Because Graywood Consulting is not represented by counsel and has failed to prosecute its counterclaims, the Magistrate Judge recommends to the District Judge the entry of default against defendant Graywood on the plaintiff's complaint and the dismissal of Graywood's counterclaims with prejudice.

Any objections to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation must be filed in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Failure to file objections within fourteen days will constitute a waiver of subsequent review absent a showing of good cause for such failure.

IT IS SO RECOMMENDED.