Opinion
Case No. 1:14-cv-593
04-07-2015
ANDREA WILSON, Plaintiff, v. BRIDGEWELL HOSPITAL/EVERGREEN, et al., Defendants.
Barrett, J.
REPORT & RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff initiated this action on July 29, 2014 against defendants alleging employment discrimination pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 2000e. (Doc. 3). On July 29, 2014, plaintiff was granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis and was ordered to inform the Court promptly of any changes in her address which may occur during the pendency of this lawsuit. (Doc. 2). Several official case related document mailing attempts by the Court to plaintiff's address listed on the Court's docket have been returned by the U.S. Postal Service marked as "undeliverable." (Docs. 19, 22, and 23). Most recent, the Court ordered plaintiff to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. (Doc. 26). To date, there is no indication from the docket that plaintiff is actively engaged in litigating this case. 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). 4/7/15
Date
/s/_________
Karen L. Litkovitz
United States Magistrate Judge
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES REGARDING FILING OF OBJECTIONS TO THIS R&R
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written objections to these proposed findings and recommendations within FOURTEEN DAYS after being served with this Report and Recommendation ("R&R"). Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(e), this period is automatically extended to seventeen days (excluding intervening Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays) because this R&R is being served by mail. That period may be extended further by the Court on timely motion for an extension. Such objections shall specify the portions of the R&R objected to, and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in support of the objections. If the R&R is based, in whole or in part, upon matters occurring of 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 FOURTEEN DAYS after being served with a copy thereof. Failure to make objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See United States v. Walters, 638 F. 2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140(1985).