Anderson v. Experian
- Andrew Carter
- 1:19-cv-08833
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Anderson v. Experian, Judge Carter dismissed the case for failure to prosecute after adopting an unchallenged report and recommendation.
Kaia Anderson’s case against Experian was dismissed for failure to prosecute, and the clerk was directed to close the case.
What happened
Kaia Anderson’s case against Experian was referred to Magistrate Judge Freeman, who recommended dismissal for failure to prosecute. The opinion does not describe the underlying claims.
Neither party filed objections after receiving notice of the right to object and the consequences of not doing so. The district court therefore reviewed the recommendation for clear error.
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. found no clear error, adopted the recommendation, dismissed the case, and directed the clerk to close it.
The detailed version
- Anderson v. Experian · No. 1:19-cv-08833
- Andrew Carter
- Sept. 30, 2020
Background
The opinion concerns a case brought by Kaia Anderson against Experian. It does not explain the underlying claims or the events leading to the lawsuit.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Freeman issued a Report and Recommendation on September 14, 2020. The recommendation was that the case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The opinion’s quoted description reads “dismissed without for failure to prosecute,” which appears incomplete; the court does not otherwise specify whether the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
The parties were notified of their right to object to the recommendation and the consequences of not objecting. No objections were filed. Because there were no timely objections, the district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record.
Ruling
Judge Andrew L. Carter, Jr. concluded that the Report and Recommendation was free of clear error. The court adopted the recommendation, dismissed the case, and directed the clerk to close the case. The order does not state that the dismissal was with or without prejudice.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.