Larry Darnell Crayton v. LVNV Funding, LLC and Webbank d/b/a Fingerhut

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS LARRY DARNELL CRAYTON, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 6:25-cv-01061-HLT-GEB LVNV FUNDING, LLC AND WEBBANK D/B/A FINGERHUT, Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff filed this action for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and other statutes on April 10, 2025. But since that time, he has repeatedly failed to respond to communications by defense counsel and the court. He also failed to appear for a scheduling conference and for a show-cause hearing. Judge Gwynne E. Birzer thus filed a Report and Recommendation (R&R) that the case be dismissed on February 23, 2026 (Doc. 32). Plaintiff did not object to the R&R. He has therefore waived his right to de novo review. See In re Key Energy Res. Inc., 230 F.3d 1197, 1199-1200 (10th Cir. 2000).1 The Court has reviewed Judge Birzer’s R&R. The Court agrees that Plaintiff has not prosecuted this case and adopts the R&R in its entirety.

THE COURT THEREFORE ORDERS that Judge Birzer’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 32) is ADOPTED. The case is dismissed without prejudice for lack of prosecution under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

1 Plaintiff proceeds pro se. Where a pro se party is not clearly apprised of the consequences of failing to object, the firm-waiver rule does not apply. Talley v. Hesse, 91 F.3d 1411, 1413 (10th Cir. 1996). Here, Judge Birzer’s R&R did clearly inform Plaintiff that he was required to file objections within 14 days if he wanted appellate review of the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law, or recommended disposition, and that appellate review would not be allowed if he did not timely file objections. Doc. 32 at 1. Although Plaintiff is not entitled to de novo review, the Court notes that it would reach the same conclusion under that standard.

The case is closed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 19, 2026 /s/ Holly L. Teeter HOLLY L. TEETER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE