SCOTT v. COLVIN, No. 1:2013cv01478 - Document 19 (S.D. Ind. 2014)
Court Description: ORDER: On January 26, 2014, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a brief in support of the complaint by March 24, 2014. [Filing No. 17.] Plaintiff failed to do so, and on April 9, 2014, the Court ordered Plaintiff to sh ow cause in writing by April 24, 2014, why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) due to Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's order. [Filing No. 18.] Th e Court expressly noted that "[a] failure to respond will be deemed consent to a dismissal without prejudice." [Filing No. 18.] Plaintiff has not responded to the Court's show cause order. Because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this action, the Court DISMISS it WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41 (b). Any pending dead lines are VACATED and all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. Final judgment shall issue accordingly (see Order for additional information). Copy to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 4/29/2014.(SWM)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
SCOTT v. COLVIN Doc. 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION MARY SCOTT, Plaintiff, vs. CAROLYN COLVIN, Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 1:13-cv-1478-JMS-MJD ORDER On January 26, 2014, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file a brief in support of the complaint by March 24, 2014. [Filing No. 17.] Plaintiff failed to do so, and on April 9, 2014, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing by April 24, 2014, why this case should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) due to Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s order. [Filing No. 18.] The Court expressly noted that “[a] failure to respond will be deemed consent to a dismissal without prejudice.” [Filing No. 18.] Plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s show cause order. A party “cannot decide for itself when it feels like pressing its action and when it feels like taking a break.” GCIU Employer Retirement Fund v. Chicago Tribune Co., 8 F.3d 1195, 1198-1199 (7th Cir. 1993). Because Plaintiff has failed to prosecute this action, the Court DISMISS it WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Any pending deadlines are VACATED and all pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT. Final judgment shall issue accordingly. 04/29/2014 _______________________________ Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge United States District Court Southern District of Indiana -1- Dockets.Justia.com Distributed by Mail: MARY SCOTT 1140 S. Somerset Ave. Indianapolis, IN 46241 Distribution via ECF only: Thomas E. Kieper UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE tom.kieper@usdoj.gov -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.
