Pinheiro v. Washington Mutual Bank, FA et al

Filing 23

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION; DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on February 25, 2013. (mmclc2, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/25/2013) (Additional attachment(s) added on 2/25/2013: # 1 Certificate of Service) (tlS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
11
12

15

v.
WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, F.A., and
others,

16

Defendants.

17

/

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE
JUDGE’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION; DISMISSING
CASE

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. C 12-5165 MMC

KEILA PINHEIRO,

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Nathanael M. Cousins’ Report and
Recommendation, filed February 5, 2013, by which said Magistrate Judge recommends the
above-titled action be dismissed for failure to prosecute. As plaintiff Keila Pinheiro was
served by mail with the Report and Recommendation on February 5, 2013, any objections
thereto were required to be filed no later than February 22, 2013. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d). No objection has been filed.
Having read and considered the procedural history of the above-titled action, and
having considered the question of dismissal de novo, the Court hereby ADOPTS, with the
limited exception set forth below, the Report and Recommendation in its entirety for the
//

1
2
3
4
5

reasons expressed therein.1
Accordingly, the above-titled action is hereby DISMISSED pursuant to Rule 41(b) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for failure to prosecute.2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: February 25, 2013
MAXINE M. CHESNEY
United States District Judge

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

1

Additionally, subsequent to Magistrate Judge Cousin’s Report and
Recommendation, the Court was informed by the ADR Unit that plaintiff failed to appear at
a scheduled telephone conference held February 15, 2013.
2

Judge Cousins recommends such dismissal be without prejudice (see Report and
Recommendation at 5), but does so in what he describes as “an abundance—perhaps
overabundance—of caution” (see id. at 4:21). Having considered the matter, the Court
finds a dismissal with prejudice is more appropriate in this instance.
2