Adams v. Gardner et al
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 1 Complaint Referred (42:1983) filed by Michael Allen Adams. Objections to R&R due by 5/22/2009. Signed by Honorable James R. Marschewski on May 5, 2009. (src)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W E ST E R N DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS FA Y E T T E V ILLE DIVISION MICHAEL ALLEN ADAMS v. OFFICER GARDNER, Washington County Detention Center; and NURSE ROSS, Washington County Detention Center Civil No. 09-5001 PLAINTIFF
D E F E ND A N T S
R E P O R T AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE Pla in tiff, Michael Allen Adams, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. He pro ceeds pro se and in forma pauperis. On April 2, 2009, the undersigned entered an order (Doc. 5) directing Adams to complete, sign and return an attached addendum to his complaint. The completed addendum was to be returned by A pril 27, 2009. Adams was advised that should he fail to return the completed and executed addendum by April 27, 2009, his complaint may be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute and/or for failure to obey an order of the court. Adams has not returned the completed addendum. He has not sought an exte nsio n of time to complete the addendum. He has not communicated with the court in anyway. I therefore recommend that this case be dismissed without prejudice based on Adams failure to prosecute this action and his failure to obey the order of the court. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Adams has ten days from receipt of the report and recommendation in which to file w r itte n 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. Adams is reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the district court. DA TE D this 5th day of May 2009. /s/ J. Marschewski HON. JAMES R. MARSCHEWSKI UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?