Leanyear v. MacDonald et al
Filing
55
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 50 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 45 MOTION to Dismiss With Prejudice for Failure to Prosecute by Defendants R Brumett, J C Gutierrez, B MacDonald, D McCarran, C Thurston. The 45 Motion is GRANTED. Clerk DIRECTED to dismiss this case with prejudice. Signed by Judge Joseph S Van Bokkelen on 6/17/14. (cer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
HAMMOND DIVISION
Antuan Leanyear,
Plaintiff,
v.
B. MacDonald, Fort Wayne Police
Officer#1837F, in his personal capacity;
et al.,
Case No. 1:12-CV-136 JVB
Defendants.
ORDER
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on March 18, 2014, asserting that this 42 U.S.C. §
1983 case should be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for Plaintiff Antuan
Leanyear’s failure to prosecute it. (DE 45.) Although Mr. Leanyear was initially represented
by counsel, he is now proceeding pro se. (DEs 1, 35.) The motion was referred to Magistrate
Judge Roger Cosbey for Report and Recommendation. (DE 46.)
On May 9, 2014, Judge Cosbey issued the report and, due to Mr. Leanyear’s apparent
disinterest in pursuing this case---and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 72(b), and Local Rule 72-1---recommended that Defendants’ motion to dismiss
be granted. As is customary, Judge Cosbey included a notice with his recommendation that
Leanyear had fourteen days to object. That deadline has long passed without any objection from
Mr. Leanyear. In fact, the last communication from Mr. Leanyear to this Court was almost a year
ago, on August 19, 2013.
The Court accepts Judge Cosbey’s Report and Recommendation (DE 50) and grants
Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (DE 45) for the reasons stated in the Report and
Recommendation. The Clerk is directed to dismiss this case with prejudice.
SO ORDERED on June 17, 2014.
S/ Joseph S. Van Bokkelen
JOSEPH S. VAN BOKKELEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?