Sultana v. Endeavor Air

Background

The court reviewed a report and recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Tony N. Leung. The recommendation advised dismissing Marc Saeed Sultana’s complaint with prejudice. Sultana, who was representing himself, objected to that recommendation.

Court’s analysis

The district court reviewed the portions of the recommendation that Sultana specifically challenged independently. It reviewed the remaining portions for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake in the record. Because Sultana was representing himself, the court interpreted his objections liberally.

Sultana argued that the recommendation did not provide enough context for several facts. He admitted sending communications outside the ordinary process despite repeated instructions from the court and said he had not intended to offend the court. He also identified an alleged medical condition as the reason for much of his conduct. The court concluded that these explanations either were incorrect on the merits or did not identify an error requiring rejection of the recommendation.

The court found that Sultana had repeatedly, and sometimes willfully, disregarded clear instructions even after receiving numerous opportunities to comply. It concluded that dismissal was warranted under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 16(f), 37, and 41(b). The opinion does not describe the underlying claims in the complaint.

Disposition

The court accepted the report and recommendation in its entirety. Judge Jerry W. Blackwell overruled Sultana’s objections and granted Endeavor Air’s motion to dismiss. The court dismissed Sultana’s complaint with prejudice, meaning the complaint could not be refiled in that form. The court also denied Sultana’s motion to amend the scheduling order as moot and directed that judgment be entered.