Medley et al v. JC Morgan Chase et al
Filing
11
ORDER signed by Judge J.P. Stadtmueller on 8/22/2017: DISMISSING Defendant Rushmore from this action and DISMISSING CASE without prejudice for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute. (cc: all counsel, via mail to Anne L. Medley)(jm)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN
ANNE L. MEDLEY,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 16-CV-1716-JPS-JPS
RUSHMORE,
Defendant.
ORDER
On August 15, 2017, the Court dismissed “JC Morgan Chase”
(“Chase”) as a defendant in this action pursuant to the recommendation of
Magistrate Judge David E. Jones. (Docket #9). Magistrate Jones determined
that Plaintiff had provided no evidence of service for Chase as required by
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m). (Docket #8). The sole remaining
defendant, “Rushmore,” must now also be dismissed. According to the
return of service provided by Plaintiff, Rushmore was served on February
7, 2017. (Docket #2 at 2). Rushmore has not filed an answer or otherwise
mounted a defense to this lawsuit, and Plaintiff has not sought default
judgment against it. On July 11, 2017, in accordance with Civil Local Rule
41(b), Magistrate Jones gave notice to Plaintiff that Rushmore would be
dismissed within twenty-one days if she did not seek default judgment.
(Docket #7). That time is now passed and the Court has received no motion
for default judgment.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Rushmore be and the same is
hereby DISMISSED from this action; and
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this action be and the same is
hereby DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute
the same.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly.
Dated at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, this 22nd day of August, 2017.
BY THE COURT:
____________________________________
J. P. Stadtmueller
U.S. District Judge
Page 2 of 2
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?