Hardy Willimas v. Spencer
Filing
6
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 4 Report and Recommendation dismissing with prejudice for lack of prosecution. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 5/18/15. (ba)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
Lisa Dawn Hardy Willimas,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 1:15cv113
Cheryl Spencer,
Judge Michael R. Barrett
Defendant.
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by the
Magistrate Judge on March 25, 2015 (Doc. 4).
Proper notice has been given to the parties under 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1)(C),
including notice that the parties would waive further appeal if they failed to file objections
to the Report and Recommendation in a timely manner. United States v. Walters, 638
F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981). The Court notes, however, that though such notice was served
upon Plaintiff, it was returned to the Court due to Plaintiff’s failure to apprise the Court of
her change of address. By failing to keep the Court apprised of her current address,
Plaintiff demonstrates a lack of prosecution of her action. See, e.g., Theede v. United
States Department of Labor, 172 F.3d 1262, 1265 (10th Cir. 1999)(Failure to object to a
Magistrate Judge=s Report and Recommendation due to delay resulting from party=s
failure to bring to the Court=s attention a change in address constitutes failure to object in
a timely manner. Because the Recommendation was mailed to the last known address, it
was properly served, and party waived right to appellate review). See also Jourdan v.
Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 109 (6th Cir. 1991)(A pro se litigant has an affirmative duty to
1
diligently pursue the prosecution of his cause of action); Barber v. Runyon, No. 93-6318,
1994 WL 163765, at *1 (6th Cir. May 2, 1994) (A pro se litigant has a duty to supply the
court with notice of any and all changes in his address). No objections to the Magistrate
Judge=s Report and Recommendation have been filed.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 4) of the
Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. This action is DISMISSED with PREJUDICE
for lack of prosecution.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), any request for certificate of appealability or
request to appeal in forma pauperis would not be taken in good faith and would be
denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Michael R. Barrett
Michael R. Barrett
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?