Mitchell v. Vienna Correctional Center

Filing 28

ORDER, the Court ADOPTS IN FULL (Doc. 24 ) Judge Williams' R&R, GRANTS Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 19 ), and DISMISSES this case WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Michael J. Reagan on 07/01/2014. (dkd)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
KENNETH L. MITCHELL,
Plaintiff,
vs.
RANDY DAVIS,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 13–cv–0627–MJR–SCW

MEMORANDUM & ORDER
REAGAN, District Judge:
This § 1983 civil rights case is before the Court on Defendant Randy Davis’ Motion to
Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution (Doc. 19). On June 4, 2014, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b) and
(c), Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams recommended that the motion—to which Plaintiff made
no response—be granted. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and SDIL-LR 73.1(b), Plaintiff was given
until June 23, 2014, to lodge any objections to Judge Williams’ Report and Recommendation
(“R&R”). No objection has been filed.
While Plaintiff’s failure to object means the Court can summarily adopt Judge Williams’
R&R (pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C), de novo review is not required), it bears mentioning that
Judge Williams’ analysis and conclusions are entirely sound. Plaintiff failed to appear for a properly
noticed deposition, failed to respond to Defendant’s motion, failed to keep the Court informed of
his whereabouts as the case progressed, and failed to appear at a court hearing on Defendant’s Rule
41 motion. J ohnson v. Chi. Bd. of Educ. , 718 F.3d 731, 733 (7th Cir. 2013) (serious and/or
repeated errors a prerequisite for Rule 41(b) dismissal). He was warned several times that
dismissal would be the consequence for his inaction. See Ball v. City of Chi. , 2 F.3d 752, 760 (7th
Cir. 1993) (explicit warning required before Rule 41(b) dismissal).
1

Because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute his case with diligence, and because he failed to
follow discovery orders in the case, the Court ADOPTS IN FULL (Doc. 24) Judge Williams’
R&R, GRANTS Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 19), and DISMISSES this case WITH
PREJUDICE. S ee Lucien v. Breweur, 9 F.3d 26, 28 (7th Cir. 1993) (dismissal is a “feeble
sanction” if it is without prejudice).
The Clerk is directed to CLOSE the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/ Michael J. Reagan
MICHAEL J. REAGAN
United States District Judge

DATE: July 1, 2014

2