Opinion
Case No. 4:16mc16-RH/CAS
07-07-2017
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. ARIEL QUIROS, WILLIAM STENGER, et al., Defendants, and JAY CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, INC., et al., Relief Defendants.
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This case was initiated on April 21, 2016, by Michael I. Godlberg, as court-appointed Receiver pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 754. ECF No. 1. An initial Order was entered on April 27, 2016, acknowledging those filings, however, no further action took place for nine months. Thus, an Order was entered on January 26, 2017, requiring the receiver to demonstrate that this case concerns property within the Northern District of Florida such that this case should continue to remain open. ECF No. 4. The Receiver filed a response requesting additional time in which to make that demonstration. ECF No. 5. The request was granted, ECF No. 6, but by June 30, 2017, the Receiver was required to demonstrate the necessity of continuing this litigation. That Order warned that if no response was filed, a recommendation would be made to dismiss this case for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b). Id. As of this date, no response has been filed and there is no indication on the record demonstrating the necessity of continuing this case. Accordingly, the case should now be dismissed.
If the Receiver objects to this action, a motion for reconsideration must be filed no later than July 21, 2017. Such a motion must simultaneously demonstrate either that assets have been located within this District or that a substantial investigation has been made in a good faith effort to comply with the prior orders.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED for failure to prosecute.
IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on July 7, 2017.
S/ Charles A. Stampelos
CHARLES A. STAMPELOS
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
NOTICE TO THE PARTIES
Within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of this Report and Recommendation, a party may serve and file specific written objections to these proposed findings and recommendations. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). A copy of the objections shall be served upon all other parties. A party may respond to another party's objections within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy thereof. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the Court's internal use only and does not control. If a party fails to object to the Magistrate Judge's findings or recommendations as to any particular claim or issue contained in this Report and Recommendation, that party waives the right to challenge on appeal the District Court's order based on the unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636.