UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

STEVEN DYE

Plaintiff,

v. Case Number: 09-CV-12504

Honorable Denise Page Hood

CITY OF WARREN, et. al.,

Defendants.

______________________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING IN PART AND REJECTING IN PART MAGISTRATE JUDGE

DONALD A. SCHEER’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Donald A. Scheer’s Report and

Recommendation (“R&R”) [Docket No. 28, filed on April 19, 2010]. Neither party has filed an

objection, and the time to do so has expired. 

Plaintiff Steven Dye initially filed this action in Macomb County Circuit Court, bringing

claims against Defendants under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, in addition to state law claims. His

Complaint arose from an incident in which Plaintiff was allegedly assaulted and arrested for

failing to disclose a handgun he had in his possession, despite having made the officers aware of

his Concealed Carry Weapon permit and authorization to carry a gun or firearm. Defendants

timely removed the matter to this Court. 

This Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Scheer’s application of the analysis set forth in

Regional Refuse Systems, Inc. v. Inland Reclamation Co., 842 F.2d 150 (6th Circuit 1988), to

determine whether dismissal is appropriate for a party who fails to obey an order to provide or

permit discovery. Magistrate Judge Scheer reports that Plaintiff’s counsel has failed to provide

written responses to Defendants’ three motions regarding discovery and/or dismissal. Plaintiff
has ignored two court Orders compelling discovery compliance and sanctions. The discovery

that was initially provided by Plaintiff in this case was unsworn and “pitifully inadequate.” R&R

at 4. Magistrate Judge Sheer also notes that Plaintiff failed to appear for his settlement

conference, and has done “virtually nothing” to advance his case. Id. 

Magistrate Judge Scheer, who oversaw discovery compliance and heard various motions

in this matter, recommended that this Court grant Defendant’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss for

Failure to Comply with Court Order or to Compel Discovery and Award Sanctions [Docket No.

23, filed on January 18, 2010], and to dismiss this case with prejudice. This Court agrees that

Defendant’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Comply with Court Order or to Compel

Discovery and Award Sanctions should be granted, and dismissal is appropriate. As it is unclear

to this Court whether Plaintiff or Plaintiff’s counsel is at fault for failing to comply and

cooperate in this matter, Plaintiff’s case is dismissed without prejudice. 

Accordingly, for the reasons set forth above and in the Report and Recommendation,

IT IS ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Donald A. Scheer’s Report and

Recommendation [Docket No. 28, filed on April 19, 2010] is ACCEPTED IN PART as this

Court’s findings and conclusions of law. Defendant’s Renewed Motion to Dismiss for Failure

to Comply with Court Order or to Compel Discovery and Award Sanctions [Docket No. 23,

filed on January 18, 2010] is GRANTED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE.

S/Denise Page Hood 

Denise Page Hood

United States District Judge

Dated: June 30, 2010

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on June 30, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

S/William F. Lewis 

Case Manager