RANSAW v. LUCAS, 1:09-cv-2332. (2014)
Court: District Court, N.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20141023k53
Visitors: 19
Filed: Oct. 20, 2014
Latest Update: Oct. 20, 2014
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING THE DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION LESLEY WELLS, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Nancy A. Vecchiarelli's Report and Recommendation ("R&R") advising that the Court grant the defendants' joint motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution. (Doc. 154). No timely objections to the R&R have been filed. Having reviewed the R&R, the Court agrees wi
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING THE DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION LESLEY WELLS, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Nancy A. Vecchiarelli's Report and Recommendation ("R&R") advising that the Court grant the defendants' joint motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution. (Doc. 154). No timely objections to the R&R have been filed. Having reviewed the R&R, the Court agrees wit..
More
ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND GRANTING THE DEFENDANTS' JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS FOR LACK OF PROSECUTION
LESLEY WELLS, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Nancy A. Vecchiarelli's Report and Recommendation ("R&R") advising that the Court grant the defendants' joint motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution. (Doc. 154). No timely objections to the R&R have been filed. Having reviewed the R&R, the Court agrees with the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. This Court accordingly adopts the R&R as its own.1
The defendants' joint motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution is granted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), this Court makes a de novo determination of those portions of the R&R to which a timely objection is made. "When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee's note.
Source: Leagle
