IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
July 26, 2012
GERALD J. HILL, PLAINTIFF,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Reagan, District Judge:
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On April 18, 2011, Gerald Hill filed suit seeking compensation for personal injuries he sustained while he was housed in the Federal Correctional Institution at Greenville, Illinois.*fn1 Hill alleged that he was attacked by a fellow inmate and beaten with a metal device. As a result, he lost his right eye, suffered multiple fractures to his face and has permanent damage. He asserts that the assault and his injuries were caused by the negligence and lack of supervision by prison staff, and their failure to follow Bureau of Prisons' policies.
On June 29, 2012, Magistrate Judge Stephen C. Williams submitted a Report and Recommendation ("the Report") pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), regarding the United States' motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution (Docs. 18, 20). The Report finds that Hill failed to inform the Court of his change of address despite the undersigned Judge's order that failure to comply with this requirement could result in dismissal of his action for want of prosecution. The Report notes that Hill's mail was returned as undeliverable on June 6 and 13, 2012.*fn2 Moreover, Hill failed to appear for a show cause hearing set by Judge Williams to allow Hill to show cause why his case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
The Report was sent to the parties with a notice informing them of their right to appeal by way of filing "objections" within 14 days of service of the Report. To date, neither party has filed objections. The period in which to file objections has expired. Therefore, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), this Court need not conduct de novo review. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-52 (1985).
Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) in its entirety, GRANTS the United States' motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution (Doc. 18) and DISMISSES this action without prejudice.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
MICHAEL J. REAGAN United States District Judge