Livingston v. Geico et al

Filing 11

ORDER ADOPTING 9 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN FULL. The case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The clerk of court is directed to close the case. Signed by Judge Jill N. Parrish on 3/30/17. (jlw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH

LINTON DALE LIVINGSTON,
Plaintiff,

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATION

v.
Case No. 2:16-cv-00878-JNP-DBP
GEICO, and HERTZ RENTAL
COMPANY,

District Judge Jill N. Parrish
Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead

Defendants.

Pro se Plaintiff Linton Dale Livingston filed his complaint against Defendants on August
17, 2016. The court referred this matter to Magistrate Judge Dustin B. Pead pursuant to 28
U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Plaintiff filed a motion to amend his complaint on September 13, 2016,
and attached a proposed amended complaint as an exhibit. On November 15, 2016, the court
entered an order finding the motion to amend moot and noting that the complaint filed was
missing a page. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) requires a summons and the complaint to
be served on the Defendants within 90 days after the complaint was filed. To date, 225 days have
elapsed since Plaintiff filed his complaint and Plaintiff has not provided the court with proof of
service, nor has he filed any motion regarding service of process.

On January 19, 2017, the court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why this action should not
be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The court advised Plaintiff that failure to respond would
result in dismissal of this case. To date, Plaintiff has not responded.1
On February 14, 2017, Judge Pead filed a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 9)
recommending that the case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Judge Pead’s Report and
Recommendation provided that any objection to his recommendation was to be filed with the
court within fourteen days of service. The time to object has now expired and the court has
received no objections to the Report and Recommendation.
Based on the court’s de novo review of the record, the relevant legal authorities, and
Judge Pead’s Report and Recommendation, the court concludes that the Report and
Recommendation is a correct application of the law and the facts. Accordingly, the court
ORDERS as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 9) is ADOPTED IN FULL.
2. The case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case.
SO ORDERED this 30th day of March, 2017.
BY THE COURT:

________________________________________
JILL N. PARRISH
United States District Judge

1

Both the Order to Show Cause and the Report and Recommendation were filed electronically on the court’s case
management/electronic case filing system and were mailed to the address on file for Mr. Livingston. But both
mailings were returned to the court as undeliverable. It appears that Mr. Livingston has failed to provide the court
with his current mailing address.

2