MCBEE v. SECURITY CREDIT SYSTEMS - Document 14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT D I S T R IC T OF NEW JERSEY R H O N D A McBEE, Plaintiff, v. S E C U R IT Y CREDIT SYSTEMS, Defendant. C iv il Action Number: 2:09-02764 O P IN IO N H O N . WILLIAM J. MARTINI O P IN IO N B e f o re the Court is the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge below re c o m m e n d in g granting Defendant Security Credit Systems' motion to dismiss. The basis for th e recommendation was Plaintiff's failure to comply with discovery obligations, even after a n express warning from the Court that should she continue to fail to comply she risked d is m is s a l of her action with prejudice. Even after being warned, Plaintiff did not comply with h e r discovery obligations. Thereafter, Defendant filed a motion to dismiss. Plaintiff filed no o p p o sitio n brief and Plaintiff filed no objections to the Magistrate Judge's report and re c o m m e n d a tio n . With respect to dispositive motions, such as Plaintiff's motion to dismiss, the district  court must make a de novo determination of those portions of the magistrate judge's Report to which a litigant has filed an objection. See 28 U.S.C. � 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); L . Civ. R. 72.1(c)(2). When no objections are made in regard to a report or parts thereof, the D is tric t Court will adopt the report and accept the recommendation if it is "satisf[ied] ... that th e re is no clear error on the face of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 Advisory Committee's N o te s (citation omitted); see Peerless Ins. Co. v. Ambi-Rad, Ltd., Civil Action No. 07-5402, 2 0 0 9 WL 790898, at *3 (D.N.J. 2009). Having examined the report and recommendation and the filings of the parties, the C o u rt is satisfied that the Magistrate Judge below correctly applied Poulis v. State Farm & C a s . Co., 747 F.3d 863 (3d Cir. 1984), to the facts of this case. The sanction of dismissal was a p p ro p ria te where, as here, Plaintiff failed to comply with her discovery obligations after h a v in g been expressly warned that failure risked dismissal of her action. The Court ADOPTS the report and recommendation, GRANTS the motion, and D I S M I S S E S this action. A n appropriate order follows. DATE: March 29, 2010 s/ William J. Martini William J. Martini, U.S.D.J. 2