Bates v. Wal-Mart Stores East
Bates v. Wal-Mart Stores East
Trial Court Opinion
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA RUTH BATES, : Plaintiff, : 3:22-CV-668 : (JUDGE MARIANI) V. : WAL-MART STORES EAST, d/b/a : FILED WAL-MART . : SCRANTON Defendant. : FEB 20 2024 per YM) ORDER DEPUTY CLERK . A . . AND NOW, THIS Lt DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024, upon review of Magistrate Judge Karoline Mehalchick’s Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 9) for clear error or manifest injustice, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. The R&R (Doc. 9) is ADOPTED for the reasons set forth therein. 2. Plaintiff's action is DISMISSED pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) for failure to comply with the Court's Orders and for failure to prosecute this action.’ 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this action. G Js i
Robert D. Mariani United States District Judge
1 Judge Mehalchick’s reasoning and conclusion that Plaintiff has failed to prosecute and has abandoned this action is further supported by Plaintiff's failure to file any Objections to the pending R&R. The Court also agrees with the R&R’s findings that an application of the Poulis factors supports the dismissal of this action. See Doc. 9, at 4-9; Poulis v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Co.,
747 F.2d 863(3d Cir. 1984), .
Reference
- Status
- Unknown