Summary
dismissing plaintiff's complaint where plaintiff failed to attend her deposition and then again failed to appear in defiance of a court order
Summary of this case from Pharma Funding, LLC v. FLTX HoldingsOpinion
1:06-cv-821-WSD.
October 5, 2007
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [51], Defendant's Motion for Sanctions and to Dismiss [48], Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel [47], and Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time [50].
Because no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed, the Court must conduct a plain error review of the record. United States v. Slay, 714 F.2d 1093, 1095 (11th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1050 (1984). After a careful review of the R R and the record, the Court finds no plain error in the R R's findings that the Complaint should be dismissed. Plaintiff did not respond to Defendant's motion to dismiss, indicating pursuant to Local Rule 7.1B that she did not oppose the motion. Plaintiff also failed to appear for her own deposition, and has otherwise failed to prosecute her case or to obey the orders of the Court. Dismissal is appropriate. The Court also finds no plain error in the R R's recommendations that sanctions not be awarded and that Plaintiff's request to appoint an attorney be denied.
Plaintiff changed addresses during this litigation. On July 30, 2007, Plaintiff notified the Court of the change of address in a letter. On August 1, 2007, Defendants filed their motion to dismiss and for sanctions. On September 10, 2007, Defendants filed a notice with the Court indicating that they had mailed their motions to Plaintiff's previous address, and were now mailing the motions to her correct current address.
This corrected service error does not affect the Court's decision today. The R R was sent to Plaintiff's correct address on September 4, 2007. The R R contained clear instructions regarding filing objections and the consequences of failing to file objections. Plaintiff did not file any objections to the R R, nor has she to this date filed any submission, statement, or objection regarding the R R or Defendant's motions.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court ADOPTS AS ITS ORDER the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [51]. Defendant's Motion for Sanctions and to Dismiss [48] is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART consistent with the R R. Plaintiff's Motion to Appoint Counsel [47] is DENIED. Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time [50] is DENIED AS MOOT.
SO ORDERED.