White v. Commissioner Social Security

Filing 11

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 2 Complaint filed by Ronnie L White, Jr.- The Court RECOMMENDS, pursuant to the Order to Show Cause (doc. 9 ), that this case be DISMISSED on account of pro se Plaintiffs failure to prosecute and in light of his failure to comply with Sixth Amended Magistrate Judges General Order No. 11. Objections to R&R due by 11/25/2013. Signed by Magistrate Judge Michael J Newman on 11/06/13. (pb1)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
RONNIE L. WHITE, JR.,
Plaintiff,

Case No.: 3:13-cv-173

vs.
COMMISSIONER OF
SOCIAL SECURITY,

District Judge Walter H. Rice
Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman

Defendant.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 1

When pro se Plaintiff did not file his Statement of Errors within the 60-day period
referenced in Sixth Amended Magistrate Judges’ General Order No. 11 (eff. Sept. 1, 2011), the
Court, acting sua sponte, afforded Plaintiff an additional fourteen days in which to do so. See
doc. 9 (Order to Show Cause). Plaintiff was then notified, in writing, that his failure to file a
Statement of Errors on or before November 1, 2013 would be cause for the Court to dismiss this
matter on lack-of-prosecution grounds and also on account of his failure to comply with General
Order No. 11. See id.
Plaintiff was provided with a copy of the Order to Show Cause and General Order No. 11
via certified mail. See Certificate of Mailing (doc. 10). Additionally, once the November 1st
deadline set forth in the Order to Show Cause passed, the Court afforded pro se Plaintiff an
additional five days in which to meet the deadline.

1

Attached hereto is a NOTICE to the parties regarding objections to this Report and
Recommendation.

No response of any kind having been received from Plaintiff, the Court
RECOMMENDS, pursuant to the Order to Show Cause (doc. 9), that this case be DISMISSED
on account of pro se Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute and in light of his failure to comply with
Sixth Amended Magistrate Judges’ General Order No. 11.
November 6, 2013
s/ Michael J. Newman
United States Magistrate Judge

-2-

NOTICE REGARDING OBJECTIONS
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written
objections to the proposed findings and recommendations within FOURTEEN days after being
served with this Report and Recommendation. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d), this period is
extended to SEVENTEEN days because this Report and Recommendation is being served by
one of the methods of service listed in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C), (D), (E), or (F), and may be
extended further by the Court on timely motion for an extension. Such objections shall specify
the portions of the Report and Recommendation objected to, and shall be accompanied by a
memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and Recommendation is based in
whole or in part upon matters occurring of record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall
promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree
upon or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise
directs. A party may respond to another party’s objections within FOURTEEN days after being
served with a copy thereof.

As is made clear above, this period is likewise extended to

SEVENTEEN days if service of the objections is made pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(C),
(D), (E), or (F). Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights
on appeal. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 153-55 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d
947, 949-50 (6th Cir. 1981).

-3-