Garcia v. Patterson-UTI Drilling

Filing 33

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS as to 32 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Judge Dee Benson on 3/6/12. (jlw)

Download PDF
lOIZ t·IAR - b P 2: I 5 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OFDH~~T F UT;:,,/j CENTRAL DIVISION DARRELL GARCIA Plaintiff, ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION vs. PATTERSON-UTI DRILLING Defendant. Case No. 2:11-cv-742 Judge Dee Benson Before the Court is the Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge David Nuffer on February l3, 2012, recommending that this case be dismissed without prejudice. This case was referred to the magistrate judge to conduct an initial pretrial conference under DUCivR72-1. The conference was scheduled for January 11,2012 at 10:30 a.m. and pro se Plaintiff, Darrell Garcia ("Plaintiff'), failed to appear. (Dkt. No. 28). The court therefore issued an Order to Show Cause why the cause should not be dismissed. (Dkt. No. 29). Plaintiff was specifically ordered to inform the court of the status of the case and intentions to proceed. ld Plaintiff failed to respond to the Order to Show Cause. Based on Plaintiff's failure to appear at hearings or participate in developing a schedule in the case, and failure to respond to the Order to Show Cause, the magistrate judge recommended that this case be dismissed without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 32). The parties were notified of their right to file objections to the Report and Recommendation within fourteen days after receiving it. Neither party has filed such an objection. Having reviewed all relevant materials, including the reasoning set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation and hereby dismisses the case without prejudice. DATED this ~ day of March, 2012. D..-U- ;)..-e-~J1-.Dee Benson 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?