Filed: May 05, 2014
Latest Update: May 05, 2014
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION NORAH McCANN KING, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff was ordered to report on the status of this case by May 2, 2014 in light of defendant's failure to respond to the Complaint by April 17, 2014. Order, ECF 4. Plaintiff has failed to respond to that order and it appears that plaintiff has abandoned the prosecution of this case. It is therefore RECOMMENDED that the action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute. If any party seeks review by the Dis
Summary: REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION NORAH McCANN KING, Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff was ordered to report on the status of this case by May 2, 2014 in light of defendant's failure to respond to the Complaint by April 17, 2014. Order, ECF 4. Plaintiff has failed to respond to that order and it appears that plaintiff has abandoned the prosecution of this case. It is therefore RECOMMENDED that the action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute. If any party seeks review by the Dist..
More
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
NORAH McCANN KING, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff was ordered to report on the status of this case by May 2, 2014 in light of defendant's failure to respond to the Complaint by April 17, 2014. Order, ECF 4. Plaintiff has failed to respond to that order and it appears that plaintiff has abandoned the prosecution of this case.
It is therefore RECOMMENDED that the action be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to prosecute.
If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report and Recommendation, that party may, within fourteen (14) days, file and serve on all parties objections to the Report and Recommendation, specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part thereof in question, as well as the basis for objection thereto. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
The parties are specifically advised that failure to object to the Report and Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and of the right to appeal the decision of the District Court adopting the Report and Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); Smith v. Detroit Fed'n of Teachers, Local 231 etc., 829 F.2d 1370 (6th Cir. 1987); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
