Opinion
Case No. 11-1080.
August 29, 2011
ORDER
On August 2, 2011, a Report Recommendation was filed by Magistrate Judge John A. Gorman in the above captioned case. More than ten (10) days have elapsed since the filing of the Report Recommendation, and no objections have been made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b); Lockert v. Faulkner, 843 F.2d 1015 (7th Cir. 1988); and Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd., 797 F.2d 538, 539 (7th Cir. 1986). As the parties failed to present timely objections, any such objections have been waived.Id.
The relevant procedural history is sufficiently set forth in the comprehensive Report Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Suffice it to say that Plaintiff has brought this litigation alleging that she was the victim of employment discrimination. Defendant moved to dismiss the Complaint, arguing that Plaintiff has failed to prosecute her case by failing to participate in either the original Rule 16 conference or the rescheduled Rule 16 conference or making any attempt to respond to counsel's efforts to contact her regarding preparation for the Rule 16 conferences. The Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's detailed discussion and recommendation that the case should be dismissed as a result of Plaintiff's failure to prosecute her case in any reasonable manner.
Accordingly, the Court now adopts the Report Recommendation [#18] of the Magistrate Judge in its entirety. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution [#15] is GRANTED. This matter is now TERMINATED.