Opinion
Case No. 8:07-CV-2096-T-27EAJ.
August 28, 2008
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On June 4, 2008, the court entered an Order (Dkt. 15) granting Plaintiff's counsels' Motion to Withdraw (Dkt. 13). Because Plaintiff is a corporation and therefore unable to represent itself, Local Rule 2.03(e), M.D. Fla., the court directed Plaintiff to retain new counsel to file a notice of appearance on or before June 30, 2008. Further, the court warned Plaintiff that failure to retain new counsel, or failure by new counsel to file a notice of appearance, could result in dismissal of this action. Nevertheless, no notice of appearance has been filed in this case.
A court may "on its own . . . issue any just orders . . . if a party or its attorney . . . fails to obey a scheduling or other pretrial order." Rule 16(f), Fed.R.Civ.P.; see e.g. Goforth v. Owens, 766 F.2d 1533, 1535 (11th Cir. 1985) (finding dismissal under Rule 16(f) an appropriate sanction where counsel disregarded court's pretrial orders); Weaver v. Beard, 2008 WL 2561976, *1 (M.D. Fla. 2008) (adopting report and recommendation to dismiss without prejudice where Plaintiff failed to comply with pretrial order). Plaintiff corporation was notified at its last known address of record that it was to obtain new counsel who in turn were directed to file a notice of appearance with the court. Plaintiff, or Plaintiff's counsel if counsel has been retained, has indisputably failed to obey the June 4, 2008 order. Consequently, the court is justified in dismissing this case without prejudice pursuant to Rule 16(f), Fed.R.Civ.P. No lesser sanctions will suffice because Plaintiff's case cannot go forward unless it is represented by counsel.
Accordingly and upon consideration, it is RECOMMENDED that: DISMISSED
(1) this action be without prejudice for failure to comply with a pretrial order of the court; and (2) the Clerk of the Court be directed to close the file.