Opinion
21-11747
05-03-2022
ROBERT MEADOWS, Plaintiff, v. MELISSA SCHWARTZ, BRIAN HARTWELL, and COURTNEY MORGAN, in their official capacities, and MICHAEL L. STEINBERG, in his individual capacity, Defendants.
ORDER DISMISSING DEFENDANT MICHAEL L. STEINBERG and PLAINTIFF'S CAUSE OF ACTION
Denise Page Hood, United States District Judge
I. INTRODUCTION
Pro se Plaintiff Robert Meadows filed this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action on July 13, 2021. On April 1, 2022, the Court granted a Motion to Dismiss filed by Defendants Melissa Schwartz, Brian Hartwell, and Courtney Morgan. ECF No. 33. In its April 1, 2022 Order, the Court also found that the only remaining Defendant, Michael L. Steinberg, had never been served with a summons and complaint and issued Plaintiff an Order to Show Cause why his cause of action against Defendant Michael L. Steinberg should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute and the absence of federal subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 (federal question) or 1332 (diversity of parties). Id. at PageID.142-43. The Court ordered Plaintiff to file his written response to the Order to Show Cause on or before April 25, 2022.
As of the date of this Order, Plaintiff has not: (a) filed a response to the Order to Show Cause; (b) taken any action to prosecute his case against Defendant Michael L. Steinberg; or (c) communicated with the Court in any manner. For these reasons, the Court concludes that Plaintiff's cause of action against Defendant Michael L. Steinberg should be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Because the dismissal of Defendant Michael L. Steinberg results in no remaining Defendants in this cause of action, the Court concludes that Plaintiff's cause of action must be dismissed.
Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's cause of action is DISMISSED against Defendant Michael L. Steinberg.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as there are no remaining Defendants, Plaintiff's cause of action is DISMISSED in its entirety.
IT IS ORDERED.