Carpenter v. Clagg et al
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation re 34 Report and Recommendation dismissing 8 Complaint with prejudice for lack of prosecution. Signed by Judge Michael R. Barrett on 4/18/17. (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
Case No. 1:16cv429
Rosie Clagg, et al.,
Judge Michael R. Barrett
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation filed by the
Magistrate Judge on March 16, 2017 (Doc. 34).
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 his change of address (Doc. 35 PageID 126). Also returned to this Court on
March 7, 2017 and March 14, 2017 (Docs. 32 and 33) are Orders which either show
caused the Defendant to respond or provided for extensions of time in the case calendar.
By failing to keep the Court apprised of his current address, Plaintiff demonstrates a lack
of prosecution of his 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 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. 34) of
the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. The Complaint (Doc. 8) is DISMISSED with
prejudice for lack of prosecution.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Michael R. Barrett
Michael R. Barrett
United States District Judge
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?