Henry v. Abbott Laboratories

Filing 24

ORDER granting 17 Motion to reinstate case and for leave to file a supplemental motion for relief from judgment; granting 20 Motion for Leave to File; adopting Report and Recommendations re 22 . Signed by Judge George C Smith on 2/12/14. (lvw1)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
EASTERN DIVISION

DELPHINE HENRY,
Plaintiff,

vs.

Case No.: 2:12-cv-841
JUDGE SMITH
Magistrate Judge Abel

ABBOTT LABORATORIES,
Defendant.

ORDER
On January 3, 2014, the United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and
Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion to Reinstate her civil case be granted on
the grounds of excusable neglect. (See Report and Recommendation, Doc. 22). The parties were
advised of their right to object to the Report and Recommendation. This matter is now before the
Court on Defendant’s Objection to the Report and Recommendation. (See Doc. 23). The Court
will consider the matter de novo. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3).
The Magistrate Judge held that Plaintiff was entitled to relief from judgment under Rule
60(b)(6). The objections, however, merely present the arguments and issues presented to and
considered by the Magistrate Judge in the Report and Recommendation. Specifically, Defendant
objects to the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion, arguing that “Judge Abel either wrongfully
discounted or ignored Plaintiff’s negligence.” (Objections at 3). In closely reviewing this case,
the Court was also troubled by Plaintiff’s own negligence in signing off on the withdrawal of her

former attorney and providing an incorrect mailing address. If that was the end of the analysis,
the outcome of this decision might be different. As Defendant correctly asserts, had Plaintiff
correctly provided her mailing address, she would have been informed of the status of her case.
However, Plaintiff at some point began discussing her case with Attorney Patmon, although it is
unclear as to how soon after the withdrawal. Nonetheless, the Magistrate Judge correctly
reasoned that “plaintiff believed that she was represented by counsel and had no reason to expect
the Court would be contacting her.” (R&R at 5). Therefore, for the reasons stated in the Report
and Recommendation, this Court finds that the objections are without merit.
The Report and Recommendation, Document 22, is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED.
Plaintiff’s motion to reinstate her case (Doc. 17) and her motion for leave to file a supplemental
motion for relief from judgment instanter are hereby GRANTED. Accordingly, the Clerk of this
Court is hereby instructed to reopen this case.
The Clerk shall remove Documents 17, 20, and 22 from the Court’s pending motions list.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ George C. Smith__________________
GEORGE C. SMITH, JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2