Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Flores v. Bradley, 7:19-cv-00865-KOB-HNJ. (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. Alabama Number: infdco20190919664 Visitors: 5
Filed: Aug. 18, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 18, 2019
Summary: ORDER OF DISMISSAL KARON OWEN BOWDRE , Chief District Judge . On June 7, 2019, the magistrate judge ordered the respondent to show cause why the relief requested by the petitioner should not be granted. (Doc. 2). The copy of that Order served on the petitioner at the address provided by her was returned to the court marked "No longer here." (Doc. 3). Therefore, the court located the petitioner at FMC Carswell, in Fort Worth, Texas, and on June 18, 2019, ordered the petitioner to notify the
More

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

On June 7, 2019, the magistrate judge ordered the respondent to show cause why the relief requested by the petitioner should not be granted. (Doc. 2). The copy of that Order served on the petitioner at the address provided by her was returned to the court marked "No longer here." (Doc. 3). Therefore, the court located the petitioner at FMC Carswell, in Fort Worth, Texas, and on June 18, 2019, ordered the petitioner to notify the court within fourteen days that FMC Carswell was her correct address and that she wished to continue prosecuting this action. (Doc. 4).

When that time expired and the petitioner failed to comply with that Order, or otherwise respond to the court, the magistrate judge entered a report and recommendation that this action be dismissed due to the petitioner's tacit acknowledgement that she did not wish to continue to prosecute this action. (Doc. 6). Although the petitioner was advised of her right to file specific written objections within fourteen days, she filed no objections.

Having carefully reviewed and considered de novo all the materials in the court file, including the report and recommendation, the court ADOPTS the magistrate judge's report and ACCEPTS his recommendation. Accordingly, the court ORDERS that this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE because of the petitioner's failure to prosecute.

The respondent's motion to dismiss (doc. 5), based on the merits of the petitioner's claim under the First Step Act, is found to be MOOT.

DONE and ORDERD.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer