Doss v. Kenco Logistic Services LLC

Filing 89

ORDER entered by Judge Colin Stirling Bruce on 7/25/2017. The Report and Recommendation 88 is accepted by this Court. Defendants' Renewed Motion for Rule 37 Sanctions 87 should be GRANTED. This case is dismissed in full as a sanction for Plaintiff's failure to comply with multiple Court orders. This case is terminated. See written order. (JMB, ilcd)

E-FILED

Tuesday, 25 July, 2017 02:43:17 PM
Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
URBANA DIVISION
______________________________________________________________________________
NATHAN E. DOSS,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
v.
)
Case No. 15-CV-2287
)
KENCO LOGISTIC SERVICES, LLC,
)
et al.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
ORDER
A Report and Recommendation (#88) was filed by the Magistrate Judge in the above cause
on July 6, 2017. More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since the filing of the Recommendation
and no objections have been made.1 See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge is, therefore, accepted by the court. See Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd, 797
F.2d 538 (7th Cir. 1986).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:

1

It should be noted that Plaintiff called the clerk’s office on July 18, 2017, and claimed he
had received nothing in his case since the text order of May 9, 2017. The court finds such a
claim to be incredible, since Plaintiff has repeatedly confirmed that the address on file with the
court is his correct address, and the court has certified that all court orders have been sent to
Plaintiff at that address. Further, Plaintiff’s claim would mean that, not only is he not getting
mail from the court, but that he is not getting mail from Defendants either (including the
Renewed Motion for Rule 37 Sanctions (#87)), even though Defendants certified that they
mailed a copy of the motion to Plaintiff at the address he provided.
The court would further note that Magistrate Judge Eric Long has warned Plaintiff in the
past that he must participate in this case. Judge Long, in an Order to Show Cause (#72) from
January 11, 2017, wrote that he found “troubling” Plaintiff’s participation, “or lack thereof,” in
this case, based on Plaintiff failing to appear at status conferences, whether in person or via
telephone. Judge Long also noted Plaintiff’s failure to comply with discovery. Plaintiff was also
aware of the earlier motion for sanctions that had been filed against him, and that a Report and
Recommendation (#82) had been entered by Judge Long recommending Plaintiff be sanctioned.
Plaintiff filed an Objection (#85) to that R&R. Plaintiff was thus well aware of how important it
was, and how it was his responsibility, to stay in touch with the court and opposing parties in this
case. See also Plaintiff’s history in this case as documented in the Report and Recommendation
(#88).
In any event, Plaintiff called this court on July 18, 2017, and the clerk indicated and read
to Plaintiff the docket entries entered since May 9, 2017. The clerk confirmed Plaintiff’s given
address was correct, and, at Plaintiff’s request, mailed the documents to him. It is now July 25,
2017, a week later, and no objection has been filed, nor has any motion for an extension of time
to file an objection been filed.

(1) The Report and Recommendation (#88) is accepted by this court. Defendants’ Renewed
Motion for Rule 37 Sanctions (#87) should be GRANTED.
(2) This case is dismissed in full as a sanction for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with multiple
court orders.
(3) This case is terminated.
ENTERED this 25th day July, 2017.
s/ COLIN S. BRUCE
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

2