Unbreakable, LLC v. Fay Servicing LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION UNBREAKABLE, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 1:25-cv-02530-JRO-MKK ) FAY SERVICING LLC, ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DISMISSING COMPLAINT Brent Trotter, purporting to act on behalf of Plaintiff Unbreakable, LLC as its managing partner, filed suit pro se against Defendant Fay Servicing LLC in the Marion County Superior Court. Dkt. 1-2. Defendant removed this case to the district court for the Southern District of Indiana on December 15, 2025.

Dkt. 1. Four days later, Magistrate Judge M. Kendra Klump ordered Plaintiff to obtain counsel by January 23, 2026, because as a limited liability company, Unbreakable, LLC must be represented by counsel. Dkt. 7 at 1 (citing United States v. Hagerman, 545 F.3d 579, 581–82 (7th Cir. 2008)). Trotter did not obtain counsel according to this timeline but did inform the Court on January that “Plaintiff continues to actively pursue representation.” Dkt. 11 at 1.

At a March 5 status conference before the magistrate judge, Trotter informed the Court that continued efforts to secure counsel has so far proved unsuccessful. Dkt. 14 at 1. Defendant orally moved to dismiss the case for failure to prosecute, and the magistrate judge took that motion under advisement. Id. The magistrate judge provided Plaintiff with an additional two weeks—through March 19, 2026—to secure counsel. Jd. When no counsel appeared for Plaintiff, the magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation outlining the procedural history of this matter and recommending that Defendant Fay Servicing LLC’s oral motion to dismiss the case be granted and this complaint be dismissed without prejudice. Dkt. 15.

More than fourteen days have passed since the report and recommendation was issued, and Plaintiff has filed no objection.

After reviewing the record and the Report and Recommendation, the Court finds the magistrate judge did not commit clear error. Johnson v. Zema Sys. Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999) (district courts review unobjected portions of a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation for clear error).

Therefore, the court ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, dkt. [15] and DISMISSES with prejudice Plaintiffs complaint, dkt. [1-1]. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Ball v. City of Chicago, 2 F.3d 752, 760 (7th Cir. 1993) (“Dismissal for failure to prosecute is, as provided in Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), with prejudice ....”). Final judgment shall issue by separate order.

SO ORDERED.

Date: 4/30/2026 stin R. Olson United States District Judge Southern District of Indiana Distribution: UNBREAKABLE, LLC 4804 Laurel Canyon Boulevard Suite 1086 Los Angeles, CA 91607 Victor T. Metroff Troutman Pepper Locke [email protected] Nicholas David O'Conner Troutman Pepper Locke LLP [email protected]