United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division
H. MAYS, JR., UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation, dated December 4, 2017 (the
“Report”). (ECF No. 27.) The Report recommends
that Plaintiff Brenda Robinson's complaint seeking
judicial review of a final decision of the Commissioner of
the Social Security Administration be dismissed with
prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).
Robinson has not filed objections to the Report, and the
deadline for doing so has passed. L.R. 72.1(g)(2).
following reasons, the Report is ADOPTED and Robinson's
complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.
March 16, 2011, Robinson filed her Complaint for Review of
Decision of the Social Security Administration, alleging that
the final decision of the Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration denied her claim for Supplemental Social
Security Income benefits under Title XVI of the Social
Security Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1381, et seq.
(ECF No. 1.) The Commissioner moved to remand for further
administrative proceedings under sentence six of 42 U.S.C.
§ 405(g). (ECF No. 14.) On October 4, 2011, the motion
to remand was granted. (ECF No. 15.) The subsequent
administrative proceedings ended in an unfavorable decision
for Robinson. (ECF No. 20.)
Commissioner filed an answer in this proceeding on July 28,
2017. (ECF No. 19.) The Court then reopened the case. (ECF
August 4, 2017, an attorney with the law firm that
represented Robinson initially moved to withdraw,
representing that Robinson's attorney had withdrawn his
and his firm's representation in 2012. (ECF No. 23.) The
Court granted the motion to withdraw the same day. (ECF No.
October 19, 2017, United States Magistrate Judge Tu M. Pham
opined that “it appears that Robinson is now appearing
pro se - and has been pursuing her case as a pro
se plaintiff since shortly after her case was remanded
in October 2011, ” and that “it appears that
Robinson is currently incarcerated, and her address of record
is incorrect.” (ECF No. 25 at 393.) Having determined
that Robinson might not have received notice of the
scheduling order, the Magistrate Judge ordered the Clerk of
Court to send notification to Robinson's address of
record and to the Tennessee Prison for Women in Nashville.
(Id. at 393-94.) The Magistrate Judge also amended
the scheduling order, giving Robinson until December 1, 2017,
to respond to the Commissioner's answer. (Id. at
394.) The Magistrate Judge warned that Robinson's failure
to comply would result in dismissal of her case with
December 4, 2017, the Magistrate Judge entered the Report.
(ECF No. 26.) The Report recommends that the action be
dismissed with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 41(b). The Report explains that:
Sixth Circuit considers four factors in reviewing the
decision of a district court to dismiss a case for failure to
(1) whether the party's failure is due to willfulness,
bad faith, or fault;
(2) whether the adversary was prejudiced by the dismissed
(3) whether the dismissed party was warned that failure to
cooperate could lead to dismissal; and
(4) whether less drastic sanctions were imposed or considered
before dismissal was ordered.
Wu v. T.W. Wang, Inc., 420 F.3d 641, 643 (6th Cir.
2005) (citing Knoll, 176 F.3d at 363). Based on
these factors, the undersigned submits that dismissal of