Givhan v. Regional Medical Center

Filing 14

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT DE 11 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; ADOPTING DE 13 Report and Recommendations; ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge John T. Fowlkes, Jr on 3/3/14. (Fowlkes, J.)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
WESTERN DIVISION

ROSIE GIVHAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER,

Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:13-cv-02224-JTF-cgc

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
DENYING AS MOOT DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS
AND
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

On April 12, 2013, this case was referred to the Magistrate Judge for determination and
or for report and recommendation, pursuant to the Federal Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. §§631-39,
in order to secure its just, speedy, and inexpensive determination pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.1.
(DE #3). On November 22, 2013, Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint
pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted. (DE #11).
On January 7, 2014, the Magistrate entered an Order to Show Cause why Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss should not be granted or good cause why a response to Defendant’s Motion to
Dismiss had not been filed within twenty-eight (28) days as required by L.R. 12.1. (DE #11).
The Show Cause Order directed Plaintiff to respond within fourteen (14) days of entry of the
order or by January 21, 2014. To date, Plaintiff has not filed a response to either the Order to
Show Cause or to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss as directed. Accordingly, the Magistrate
Judge entered her Report and Recommendation on February 6, 2014, recommending that the
1

case be dismissed with prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
41(b). (DE #16). No objections have been filed.
After reviewing the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, Defendant’s
Motion to Dismiss, and the entire record, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s
Report and Recommendation. The Magistrate Judge properly weighed all four factors that guide
the Court’s determination of whether a complaint should be dismissed pursuant to Rule 41 as
provided in Knoll v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., 176 F.3d 359, 363 (6th Cir. 1999).
Further, the Magistrate Judge correctly noted that Plaintiff has failed to participate in this case
since April of 2013 and disregarded orders entered by the Court.
Therefore, the Court finds the Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation should be
ADOPTED, the case DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R.
Civ. P. 41(b), and the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as MOOT.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 3rd day of March, 2014.

BY THE COURT:

s/John T. Fowlkes, Jr.
JOHN T. FOWLKES, JR.
United States District Judge

2