Fish v. Krueger et al

Filing 67

ORDER signed by Judge J.P. Stadtmueller on 9/13/2017: GRANTING 56 Defendant Alicia Wheeler's Motion to Dismiss for Plaintiff's Failure to Prosecute; GRANTING 60 Defendant Peggy Kubiak's Motion Joining Co-Defendant's Motion to Dismiss; GRANTING 63 Additional Defendants' Motion Joining Co-Defendants' Motions to Dismiss; and DISMISSING action. (cc: all counsel, via mail to James David Fish) (jm)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
JAMES DAVID FISH,
Plaintiff,
v.
AMANDA KRUEGER, ASHLEY DEPAS,
BRANDO CROMWELL, BRIAN
BARGANZ, DEPUTY CARY
JEANQUART, CHRIS SCHLEY,
CURT VANDERTIE, DEAN TOSSOUL,
DOMINIC TURNER, DOUGLAS
JACUET, DEPUTY JAMES
WERNER, JODI MCCARTY, JOHN
MCCORMICK, JOY BORDEAU, JEFF
REINCE, KYLE VEESER, NATHAN
GUILETTE, SCOTT LOHMAN, TAMMY
STERNARD, TINA HEIDER,
PEGGY KUBIAK, and ALICIA
WHEELER,

Case No. 16-CV-1221-JPS

ORDER

Defendants.
The plaintiff, James David Fish (“Fish”), filed his complaint in this
case on September 9, 2016. (Docket #1). Upon screening, the Court allowed
Fish to proceed on an Eighth Amendment claim for deliberate indifference
to his serious medical needs and an Eighth Amendment claim relating to
the conditions of his confinement in the suicide watch unit. (Docket #8).
On May 25, 2017, defendant Alicia Wheeler (“Wheeler”) filed a
motion pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) requesting that
the Court dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint for failure to prosecute. (Docket
#56). According to Wheeler, she served discovery on Fish on March 15,

2017, seeking executed authorizations for the release of his relevant medical
and mental health records from the facilities where Fish was treated during
and around the time of the events at issue in this case. Id. at 2. After two
months went by and Fish did not respond, Wheeler followed up with a
letter to Fish on May 16, 2017, again asking that he execute and return the
releases. Id. Fish did not respond. Id.
On July 6, 2017, defendant Peggy Kubiak (“Kubiak”) filed a motion
joining Wheeler’s motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. (Docket #60).
According to Kubiak, various pleadings and notices that she attempted to
serve on Fish, including her answer, have been returned to her as
undeliverable. Id. at 2-3. Fish has not responded to Wheeler’s or Kubiak’s
motions to dismiss for failure to prosecute.
On August 28, 2017, the balance of the defendants also filed a motion
joining Wheeler’s motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute. (Docket #63).
They, too, have served discovery on Fish that has gone unanswered. Id.
On August 28, 2017, the Court ordered that Fish respond to all
outstanding discovery and file a response to the pending motion to dismiss
for failure to prosecute within ten days. (Docket #62). The Court warned
that Fish’s failure to comply would result in dismissal of his action in its
entirety without further notice. Id.
Fish has filed nothing in response to the Court’s order. This action
will, therefore, be dismissed. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 37, 41(b).
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that the defendants’ motions to dismiss for failure
to prosecute (Docket #56, #60, and #63) be and the same are hereby
GRANTED; and

Page 2 of 3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this case be and the same is hereby
DISMISSED.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 13th day of September, 2017.
BY THE COURT:

J.P. Stadtmueller
U.S. District Judge

Page 3 of 3