EDOKEDA TRADING LTD. v. MERCHANT NATIONAL, LLC et al

Filing 16

OPINION fld. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 9/11/13. (sr, )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

EDOKEDA TRADING LTD,
Plaintiff,
v.
MERCHANT NATIONAL, LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:

Civil Action No. 12-7481 (SRC)

OPINION

CHESLER, District Judge
This matter was initiated by Order To Show Cause, issued by Magistrate Judge Waldor
on July 17, 2013, directing pro se Plaintiff Edokeda Trading Ltd. to show cause why the
magistrate judge should not recommend that the district court dismiss this action for failure by
Plaintiff to prosecute his action, to appear for a court-ordered conference and to retain counsel.
The Order To Show Cause expressly warned that should Plaintiff fail to show cause as ordered,
Judge Waldor would recommend that the district judge dismiss this action. Plaintiff failed to file
any written submission or otherwise respond to the July 17, 2013 Order To Show Cause.
Accordingly, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) on August 22,
2013 pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), L. Civ. R. 72.1(a)(2), and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C)
[docket entry 10]. In it, Judge Waldor recommends that this Court dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint
with prejudice. She also expressly advised the parties of their opportunity to file objections to
the R&R in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil Rule 72.1.
1

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37, which permits the Court to “dismiss the action . . . or
render a judgment by default against the disobedient party.” Roadway Express v. Piper, 447 U.S.
752, 763 (1980) (citations omitted). The time for filing objections to the R&R has expired. 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) (“Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may
serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by
rules of court.”). No objections to it have been filed. This Court has reviewed Judge Waldor’s
R&R. It accepts and agrees with Judge Waldor’s findings and recommendation in whole.
Plaintiff, a business entity identifying itself as a “private limited company incorporated in
Mauritius” failed to retain counsel, despite the Court’s order and warning that a corporate entity
cannot proceed pro se. It has also failed to appear for court-ordered conferences or make any
effort to prosecute this action. For the reasons set forth in Judge Waldor’s R&R, this behavior,
together with Plaintiff’s failure to retain counsel, warrant imposing the sanction of dismissal
pursuant to Rule 37.
Accordingly, this Court will adopt the R&R issued on August 22, 2013 [docket entry 15]
as the opinion of the Court and will dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 37. An appropriate form of Order will be filed.

s/Stanley R. Chesler
STANLEY R. CHESLER
United States District Judge
DATED: September 11, 2013