GROVES v. AJACO TOWING, INC. et al, No. 2:2014cv03407 - Document 23 (D.N.J. 2016)

Court Description: OPINION fld. Signed by Judge Stanley R. Chesler on 10/27/16. (sr, )

Download PDF
GROVES v. AJACO TOWING, INC. et al Doc. 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CHRISTOPHER GROVES, v. AJACO TOWING, INC. et al., : : Plaintiff, : : : : : : Defendants. : : : Civil Action No. 14-3407 (SRC) OPINION CHESLER, District Judge This matter comes before this Court following the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) filed on September 13, 2016 by Magistrate Judge Waldor, pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b) and L. CIV. R. 72.1(a)(2). The R&R recommended that the Court grant Defendant’s motion to dismiss the Complaint for lack of prosecution. No objections have been received. The context for the R&R is as follows. On October 13, 2015, Magistrate Judge Waldor granted the motion to withdraw by Plaintiff’s previous counsel. Subsequently, Plaintiff neither retained new counsel nor acted pro se to continue litigating this case. On April 27, 2016, Magistrate Judge Waldor ordered Plaintiff to appear in person to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for lack of prosecution. A hearing was held on May 23, 2016, and Plaintiff did not appear. Defendant then filed a motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution. On September 13, 2016, Magistrate Judge Waldor issued the instant R&R which recommended that the motion to dismiss be granted. A magistrate judge’s recommended disposition of a dispositive matter is subject to de Dockets.Justia.com novo review. In re U.S. Healthcare, 159 F.3d 142, 145-46 (3d Cir. 1998); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b). This Court has reviewed the R&R under the appropriate de novo standard, and agrees with Magistrate Judge Waldor’s analysis and conclusion as to Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution. This Court adopts the R&R issued on September 13, 2016. Defendant’s motion to dismiss the Complaint will be granted. s/Stanley R. Chesler STANLEY R. CHESLER, U.S.D.J. Dated: October 27, 2016 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.