From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Williams v. Cooper

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Sep 15, 2015
Case No. 1:15-cv-152 (S.D. Ohio Sep. 15, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 1:15-cv-152

09-15-2015

ERIKA WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. EBB COOPER, Defendant.


Black, J.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

On August 21, 2015, the Court ordered plaintiff to either move to have default entered against defendant, or show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. (Doc. 12).

To date, plaintiff has yet to move to have default entered against defendant or to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. Accordingly, dismissal is appropriate. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 630-631 (1962); Jourdan v. Jabe, 951 F.2d 108, 109 (6th Cir. 1991).

IT IS THEREFORE RECOMMENDED THAT:

1. Plaintiff's complaint be DISMISSED with prejudice for lack of prosecution. 2. The Court certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) that for the foregoing reasons an appeal of this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore deny plaintiff leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Plaintiff, a non-prisoner, remains free to apply to proceed in forma pauperis in the Court of Appeals. See Callihan v. Schneider, 178 F.3d 800, 803 (6th Cir. 1999), overruling in part Floyd v. United States Postal Serv., 105 F.3d 274, 277 (6th Cir. 1997). Date: 9/15/15

/s/_________

Karen L. Litkovitz

United States Magistrate Judge

NOTICE

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), WITHIN 14 DAYS after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. This period may be extended further by the Court on timely motion for an extension. Such objections shall specify the portions of the Report objected to and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the Report and Recommendation is based in whole or in part upon matters occurring on the record at an oral hearing, the objecting party shall promptly arrange for the transcription of the record, or such portions of it as all parties may agree upon, or the Magistrate Judge deems sufficient, unless the assigned District Judge otherwise directs. A party may respond to another party's objections WITHIN 14 DAYS after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas v. Am, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).


Summaries of

Williams v. Cooper

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Sep 15, 2015
Case No. 1:15-cv-152 (S.D. Ohio Sep. 15, 2015)
Case details for

Williams v. Cooper

Case Details

Full title:ERIKA WILLIAMS, Plaintiff, v. EBB COOPER, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION

Date published: Sep 15, 2015

Citations

Case No. 1:15-cv-152 (S.D. Ohio Sep. 15, 2015)