Schweitzer v. Melane et al, No. 3:2021cv00154 - Document 11 (M.D. La. 2022)

Court Description: OPINION adopting 10 Report and Recommendations. Plaintiff's claims against Matthew Melane are DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 41(b)(1)(A) for failure to serve and failure to prosecute. Because Melane is the only remaining Defendant, his dismissal will result in Plaintiff's cause of action being dismissed in its entirety. Judgment shall be entered accordingly. Signed by Judge John W. deGravelles on 3/23/2022. (EDC)

Download PDF
Schweitzer v. Melane et al Doc. 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA ERIC SCHWEITZER CIVIL ACTION VERSUS NO. 21-154-JWD-SDJ FCA US LLC, ET AL OPINION After independently reviewing the entire record in this case and for the reasons set forth in the Magistrate Judge's Report dated March 4, 2022, (Doc. 10), to which no objection was filed; IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against Matthew Melane are DISMISSED without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rule 41(b)(1)(A) for failure to serve and failure to prosecute. Because Melane is the only remaining Defendant, his dismissal will result in Plaintiff’s cause of action being dismissed in its entirety.1 Judgment shall be entered accordingly. Signed in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on March 23, 2022. S JUDGE JOHN W. deGRAVELLES UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA 1 While Plaintiff’s claims against Matthew Melone should are dismissed without prejudice, his claims against Chrysler have been dismissed with prejudice. The Court’s prior Order dismissing Chrysler gave Plaintiff 28 days to file an amended Complaint correcting the “deficiencies” noted in the Court’s Order. (R. Doc. 8 at 10). If Plaintiff failed to file the amendment within 28 days, Chrysler’s dismissal would be with prejudice. (R. Doc. 8 at 10). More than 28 days have passed, and no amendment has been filed. Dockets.Justia.com

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.