Steckel v. Corrections Corporation of America Medical Department

Filing 47

ORDER. The 43 recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is accepted and Defendants Cabiling and Knapps Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Comply With Court Rules 36 is GRANTED and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for Plaintiffs failure to appe ar at the 04/07/2009 Preliminary Scheduling Conference, failure to comply with the Courts Orders and the Local Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, and failure to prosecute this civil action by Judge Lewis T. Babcock on 04/29/2009.(sah, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO LEWIS T. BABCOCK, JUDGE Civil Case No. 08-cv-01652-LTB-CBS SCOTT A. STECKEL, Plaintiff, v. JANE DOE (LORIE), LOUIS CABILING, M.D., ANTHONY A. DeCESARO, and LAURA KNAPP, R.N., Defendants. ________________________________________________________________________ ORDER ________________________________________________________________________ This case is before me on the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge issued and served on April 8, 2009 (Doc 43). Plaintiff has failed to file specific written objections to the Magistrate Judge's recommendation and is therefore barred from de novo review. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the recommendation is accepted and Defendants Cabiling and Knapp's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Comply With Court Rules (Doc 36) is GRANTED and this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for Plaintiff's failure to appear at the April 7, 2009 Preliminary Scheduling Conference, failure to comply with the Court's Orders and the Local Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Colorado, and failure to prosecute this civil action. BY THE COURT: s/Lewis T. Babcock Lewis T. Babcock, Judge DATED: April 29, 2009

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?