Doe I et al v. Bruning et al, No. 4:2010cv03003 - Document 38 (D. Neb. 2010)

Court Description: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER regarding 37 Findings and Recommendation. The magistrate judge's findings and recommendation (filing 37 ) are adopted. The plaintiffs' complaint is dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution. Final judgment will be entered by separate document. Ordered by Judge Richard G. Kopf. (JAB) Modified on 7/16/2010 to reflect copy mailed to pro se parties. (JAB)

Download PDF
Doe I et al v. Bruning et al Doc. 38 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA JOHN DOE I, and JOHN DOE II, ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) ) JON BRUNING, Attorney General of ) Nebraska, BRYAN TUMA, Col. ) Superintendant of Law Enforcement and ) Public Safety for the Nebraska State Patrol, ) GARY LACEY, Lancaster County ) Attorney, TERRY WAGNER, Lancaster ) County Sheriff, THOMAS K. CASADY, ) Lincoln Police Chief, NEBRASKA, STATE ) OF, and NEBRASKA STATE PATROL, ) ) Defendants. ) ) 4:10CV3003 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the court on the findings and recommendation filed by Magistrate Judge Zwart on June 21, 2010 (filing 37). Judge Zwart recommends that the plaintiffs’ 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 plaintiffs failed to comply with the court’s order of February 19, 2010 (filing 15), failed to respond to the “show cause” order entered on June 1, 2010 (filing 36), and failed to object to the magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, 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 37) are adopted. 2. The plaintiffs’ complaint is dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution. 3. Final judgment will be entered by separate document. DATED this 16th day of July, 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.