Opinion
21-CV-1230 (JRT/ECW)
06-29-2021
Rodney Allen Powassin, Plaintiff, v. Polk County, MN; Jeffrey Remick; Alan K. Kasprick, Prosecuting Attorney; Joel F. Arnason, Public Defender; N.W.R.C.C.; East Grand Forks Police Dep't; and Northwest Regional Correctional Center, Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ELIZABETH COWAN WRIGHT, United States Magistrate Judge
In an order dated May 20, 2021, this Court ordered Rodney Allen Powassin to show cause why this matter should not be stayed pursuant to Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971). (See Dkt. 3.) Powassin was given 30 days to explain why abstention would not be necessary pursuant to Younger, failing which it would be recommended that this action be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).
That deadline has now passed, and Powassin has not respondent to this Court's May 20 order to show cause. In fact, Powassin has not communicated with the Court at all about this case since commencing this action. Moreover, Powassin can no longer be reached at the address he used to initiate this proceeding, and he has not provided any other means by which he can be contacted. Accordingly, there is reason to believe that Powassin no longer intends to prosecute this action at this time, and this Court now recommends, in accordance with its prior order, that this action be dismissed without prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute. See Henderson v. Renaissance Grand Hotel, 267 Fed. App'x 496, 497 (8th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (“A district court has discretion to dismiss an action under Rule 41(b) for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute, or to comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or any court order.”).
RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the foregoing, and on all of the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that this action be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE under Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
NOTICE
Filing Objections: This Report and Recommendation is not an order or judgment of the District Court and is therefore not appealable directly to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Under Local Rule 72.2(b)(1), “a party may file and serve specific written objections to a magistrate judge's proposed finding and recommendations within 14 days after being served a copy” of the Report and Recommendation. A party may respond to those objections within 14 days after being served a copy of the objections. See Local Rule 72.2(b)(2). All objections and responses must comply with the word or line limits set forth in Local Rule 72.2(c).