Robinson v. Ohio Department of Corrections- Lucasville et al, No. 1:2010cv00895 - Document 57 (S.D. Ohio 2013)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 55 Report and Recommendation. The Court DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE this case for lack of prosecution. Signed by Judge S Arthur Spiegel on 3/26/2013. (km1) (Additional attachment(s) added on 3/26/2013: # 1 Certified Mail Receipt) (km1).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION JAMES S. ROBINSON, Plaintiff, v. OHIO DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS-LUCASVILLE, et al., Defendants. : : : : : : : : : : : : NO. 1:10-CV-00895 OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge s February 25, 2013 Report and Recommendation (doc. 55), to which there were no objections. The Magistrate Judge indicates that Plaintiff has failed to respond to the Court s February 4, 2013 Order to show cause why this case should not be dismissed (doc. 55). As such, the Magistrate Judge recommends the Court dismiss this matter for want of prosecution (Id.). Having Magistrate reviewed Judge s Report this and matter, the Recommendation Court finds the well-taken. The Magistrate Judge noted that district courts have the inherent power to sua sponte dismiss civil actions for want of prosecution to "manage their own affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases." Id. quoting Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 (1962). Having reviewed this matter de novo, pursuant to Title 28 U.S.C. ยง 636, the Court finds the Magistrate Judge s Report and Recommendation to be thorough, well-reasoned, and correct. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge s Report and Recommendation (doc. 55), AFFIRMS the Magistrate Judge s recommended decision (Id.), and DISMISSES WITH PREJUDICE this case for lack of prosecution. SO ORDERED. Dated: March 26, 2013 s/S. Arthur Spiegel S. Arthur Spiegel United States Senior District Judge 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.
