Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

La Angelia R. Moore v. A Plus Home Healthcare

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS PEORIA DIVISION


November 28, 2011

LA ANGELIA R. MOORE, PLAINTIFF,
v.
A PLUS HOME HEALTHCARE, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Joe Billy McDADE United States Senior District Judge

E-FILED

Wednesday, 30 November, 2011 09:49:02 AM Clerk, U.S. District Court, ILCD

ORDER & OPINION

Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Gorman's Report and Recommendation ("R&R") (Doc. 7), recommending that this matter be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Plaintiff attempted to open a Title VII employment discrimination suit by filing a motion to extend the statutory deadline for doing so, instead of filing the complaint itself. (Doc. 1). In its August 4, 2011 Order, this Court denied Plaintiff's motion for extension of time, and directed Plaintiff to file a copy of her EEOC right to sue letter so that the Court could determine if Plaintiff's claim was time barred. (Doc. 5). That Order also directed Plaintiff to supplement her Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. (Doc. 5). On August 18, 2011, the Court gave Plaintiff an extension until September 19, 2011 to comply with the August 4, 2011 Order, and Plaintiff was warned that "her suit will be subject to dismissal without further notice if she fails to comply with this Order or if she fails to submit the documents referenced in the Order of 8/3/2011." Plaintiff never filed the requested documents.

On November 4, 2011, Magistrate Judge Gorman issued the instant R&R, and warned Plaintiff that failure to timely object to it would result in a waiver of objections to the R&R. (Doc. 7). Objections to the R&R were due within fourteen days after service of the R&R. As no timely objections to the R&R were filed, Plaintiff has waived any objections to it. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd., 797 F.2d 538, 539 (7th Cir. 1986). The Court finds that involuntary dismissal for failure to prosecute is appropriate, as Plaintiff has failed to comply with the Court's orders.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Gorman's Report & Recommendation (Doc. 7) is hereby ADOPTED. This matter is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute.

CASE TERMINATED.

Joe B. McDade

20111128

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.