Shankar v. Accenture LLP
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:21-cv-03045
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
Shankar v. Accenture LLP: Judge Engelmayer dismissed the action without prejudice because Shankar failed to prosecute after months of inaction.
The action brought by Anurag Shankar against Accenture LLP was dismissed without prejudice, and the case was closed.
What happened
In Shankar v. Accenture LLP, the plaintiff, Anurag Shankar, represented himself and took no action for months. Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang ordered him to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
After another period of inaction, Judge Wang recommended dismissing the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). Accenture LLP served the order and recommendation on Shankar, but he did not object or otherwise act in the case.
Judge Paul A. Engelmayer reviewed the recommendation for clear error, adopted it in full, and dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.
The detailed version
- Shankar v. Accenture LLP · No. 1:21-cv-03045
- Paul Engelmayer
- Jan. 10, 2024
Background
Anurag Shankar, proceeding without a lawyer, had taken no action in the case for months. On June 15, 2023, Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang issued an order requiring Shankar to show why the action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Accenture LLP served that order on Shankar the next day.
After another months-long period without action by Shankar, Judge Wang issued a Report and Recommendation on November 3, 2023. It recommended dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits dismissal when a plaintiff fails to prosecute an action. Accenture served the recommendation on Shankar on November 17, 2023. Shankar did not file objections or otherwise take action.
Court’s Analysis
Because no party objected to the Report and Recommendation, the district court reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. Judge Engelmayer found no such error and adopted the recommendation in its entirety. The court also stated that Shankar’s failure to object waived appellate review, because the recommendation had warned that an objection was required within 14 days.
Disposition
The court dismissed the action without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Rule 41(b) and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.