ROSA v. WONDER
ROSA v. WONDER
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA TERRE HAUTE DIVISION
RAFAEL ROSA, III, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 2:23-cv-00445-JMS-MJD ) SETH WONDER, ) ISAAC MOREHEAD, ) ) Defendants. )
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION Magistrate Judge Dinsmore recommended that this action be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for Plaintiff Rafael Rosa's repeated failure to comply with the Court's orders. Dkt. 60. Specifically, Magistrate Judge Dinsmore recommended that the case be dismissed based on the following: (1) Mr. Rosa failed to maintain regular communication with his recruited counsel, causing them to seek withdrawal from the case; (2) Mr. Rosa failed to appear at a hearing to discuss his counsel's motion to withdraw; and (3) Mr. Rosa failed to appear at a hearing to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for his previous failure to appear. There has not been any objection to the report and recommendation or any motion to substitute. The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Dinsmore's report and recommendation, dkt. [60], in whole. See Cartwright v. Silver Cross Hospital,
962 F.3d 933, 936(7th Cir. 2020) (affirming dismissal of case as a sanction after plaintiff had repeatedly refused to engage with recruited counsel and demonstrated other contumacious conduct). This action is dismissed with prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b). The remaining pending motions, dkts. [38], [41], and [42], are now denied as moot. The clerk is directed to enter final judgment consistent with this order. IT IS SO ORDERED.
Date: 9/4/2024 Hon. Jane Magnus-Stinson, Judge ‘United States District Court Southern District of Indiana
Distribution: RAFAEL ROSA, III 2262 Market Street Apt. #2 San Diego, CA 92102 Brandyn Lee Arnold INDIANA ATTORNEY GENERAL [email protected] Katherine A Meltzer Office of Indiana Attorney General [email protected] Thomas Pratt Office of Indiana Attorney General [email protected]
Reference
- Status
- Unknown