Filed: May 23, 2018
Latest Update: May 23, 2018
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION KARLA R. SPAULDING , Magistrate Judge . TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT: This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein: MOTION: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. No. 52) FILED: April 9, 2018 On March 12, 2018, I issued an Order requiring the parties to file a Case Management Report on or before March 30, 2018. Doc. No. 49. The parties did not comply with that Order, nor did Plaintiff seek a motion for e
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION KARLA R. SPAULDING , Magistrate Judge . TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT: This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein: MOTION: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. No. 52) FILED: April 9, 2018 On March 12, 2018, I issued an Order requiring the parties to file a Case Management Report on or before March 30, 2018. Doc. No. 49. The parties did not comply with that Order, nor did Plaintiff seek a motion for ex..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
KARLA R. SPAULDING, Magistrate Judge.
TO THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT:
This cause came on for consideration without oral argument on the following motion filed herein:
MOTION: PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO DISMISS (Doc. No. 52)
FILED: April 9, 2018
On March 12, 2018, I issued an Order requiring the parties to file a Case Management Report on or before March 30, 2018. Doc. No. 49. The parties did not comply with that Order, nor did Plaintiff seek a motion for extension of time to comply. Accordingly, I issued an Order to Show Cause and required Plaintiff to show cause, in writing, on or before April 9, 2018, why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to obey a pretrial order. Doc. No. 49. Plaintiff responded to the Order to Show Cause and explained that counsel's attempts to reach Defendant Cheryl Wayson had been unsuccessful. Doc. No. 50. Plaintiff also filed a motion to dismiss Ms. Wayson as a Defendant. Doc. No. 52. Plaintiff served the motion on Ms. Wayson, but the time for responding has passed and, as of the writing of this Report and Recommendation, no response has been received. Accordingly, I consider the motion to be unopposed.
Plaintiff did not support its motion with a memorandum of law or provide a legal basis for its request,1 but I conclude that the request is most properly characterized as a request to dismiss Ms. Wayson under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(2), which provides that "an action may be dismissed at the plaintiff's request only by court order, on terms that the court considers proper." Because Ms. Wayson has not objected to the motion, I RESPECTULLY RECOMMEND that the Court GRANT Plaintiff's motion to dismiss Cheryl Wayson as a Defendant and DISMISS Plaintiff's claims against Ms. Wayson without prejudice.
NOTICE TO PARTIES
A party has fourteen days from this date to file written objections to the Report and Recommendation's factual findings and legal conclusions. A party's failure to file written objections waives that party's right to challenge on appeal any unobjected-to factual finding or legal conclusion the district judge adopts from the Report and Recommendation. See 11th Cir. R. 3-1.
