Summary
This Report and Recommendation addresses a prisoner civil rights action brought by Landis Cage in the Eastern District of Michigan. The magistrate judge recommends sua sponte dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and E.D. Mich. Local Rule 41.2, denial of the plaintiff’s motion to appoint counsel, and denial as moot of the defendants’ unopposed motion for summary judgment. The recommendation is dated January 5, 2026.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the action should be dismissed sua sponte and without prejudice for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule 41.2.
- Whether the plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel should be denied.
- Whether the defendants' unopposed motion for summary judgment should be denied as moot in light of the recommended dismissal.
Holdings
- The magistrate judge recommended dismissing the action sua sponte and without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule 41.2 because all four Sixth Circuit dismissal factors weighed in favor of dismissal.
- The magistrate judge recommended denying Cage's motion for appointment of counsel.
- The magistrate judge recommended denying the defendants' unopposed motion for summary judgment as moot because dismissal without prejudice was recommended for failure to prosecute.
Key quotations
“For the reasons stated below, I RECOMMEND DISMISSING this case this case sua sponte and without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and Eastern District of Michigan Local Rule 41.2 for failure to prosecute.” (Section I)
“In sum, all four factors weigh in favor of dismissal for failure to prosecute.” (Section II.C)
“Failure to file specific objections constitutes a waiver of any further right of appeal.” (Section III)
Factual background
Cage, a pro se prisoner litigant, was required to respond to the remaining defendants' motion for summary judgment. After granting extensions, the court stayed the case for 90 days and expressly ordered Cage to file either a signed response or an attorney appearance before the stay expired, warning that failure to do so could lead to dismissal. Cage filed neither document, although he filed two motions for appointment of counsel during the relevant period.
Procedural history
Plaintiff Landis Cage proceeded pro se in a prisoner civil-rights case after several defendants had been dismissed. The remaining defendants moved for summary judgment, and the court granted Cage extensions and then a 90-day stay to allow him to pursue treatment, directing him to file either a signed response to the summary-judgment motion or an attorney appearance. Cage filed no response or attorney appearance before or after the stay expired, although he filed additional motions for appointment of counsel. The magistrate judge issued this report and recommendation, subject to objections under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b)(2).