BRECHEEN v. FERGUSON, 11-5118. (2012)
Court: District Court, W.D. Arkansas
Number: infdco20120403833
Visitors: 3
Filed: Mar. 13, 2012
Latest Update: Mar. 13, 2012
Summary: MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ERIN L. SETSER, Magistrate Judge. On February 28, 2012, the undersigned entered an Order directing Plaintiff to advise the Court, in writing, by March 9, 2012, as to whether he intends to proceed with this action. (Doc. 19). Plaintiff was cautioned that the failure to so advise the Court would result in the dismissal of this action. As of this date, Plaintiff has failed to advise the Court as to whether he intends to proceed with this action. Acc
Summary: MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ERIN L. SETSER, Magistrate Judge. On February 28, 2012, the undersigned entered an Order directing Plaintiff to advise the Court, in writing, by March 9, 2012, as to whether he intends to proceed with this action. (Doc. 19). Plaintiff was cautioned that the failure to so advise the Court would result in the dismissal of this action. As of this date, Plaintiff has failed to advise the Court as to whether he intends to proceed with this action. Acco..
More
MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ERIN L. SETSER, Magistrate Judge.
On February 28, 2012, the undersigned entered an Order directing Plaintiff to advise the Court, in writing, by March 9, 2012, as to whether he intends to proceed with this action. (Doc. 19). Plaintiff was cautioned that the failure to so advise the Court would result in the dismissal of this action.
As of this date, Plaintiff has failed to advise the Court as to whether he intends to proceed with this action. Accordingly, the undersigned hereby recommends dismissing this action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with a court order. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b).
The parties have fourteen days from receipt of our report and recommendation in which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. The parties are reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the district court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
