Sprague v. Hilliard Energy, No. 4:2009cv03214 - Document 24 (D. Neb. 2010)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER the magistrate judge's findings and recommendation 23 are adopted; the plaintiff's complaint is dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution; final judgment will be entered by separate document as ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (Copy mailed to pro se party) (SED)

Download PDF
Sprague v. Hilliard Energy Doc. 24 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA STEPHEN J. SPRAGUE, Plaintiff, v. HILLIARD ENGERGY, LTD., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 4:09CV3214 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the findings and recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Zwart on April 27, 2010 (filing 23). Judge Zwart recommends that the plaintiff’s complaint be dismissed for want of prosecution. No objections have been filed to the findings and recommendation within the time permitted by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In any event, I have conducted a de novo review and find that Judge Zwart has correctly found the facts and applied the law. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), a dismissal for want of prosecution “operates as an adjudication on the merits” unless the court specifies otherwise. Considering that the plaintiff failed to comply with the court’s order of March 23, 2010 (filing 17), failed to respond to the defendant’s motion to compel answers to interrogatories and production of documents filed on March 26, 2010 (filing 19), failed to respond to the “show cause” order entered on April 15, 2010 (filing 22), and failed to object to Judge Zwart’s findings and recommendation (filing 23), I conclude that the action should be dismissed with prejudice. Accordingly, Dockets.Justia.com IT IS ORDERED that: 1. The magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation (filing 23) are adopted. 2. The plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution. 3. Final judgment will be entered by separate document. May 19, 2010. BY THE COURT: Richard G. Kopf United States 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.