United States District Court, D. Minnesota
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Honorable Leo I. Brisbois United States Magistrate Judge
matter came before the undersigned United States Magistrate
Judge pursuant to an Order of Referral, [Docket No, 29], and
upon Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and
Involuntary Dismissal, [Docket No. 22]. The Undersigned held
a hearing on the Motion on December 11, 2017, after which the
Motion was taken under advisement. (Minute Entry, [Docket No.
reasons set forth below, the Undersigned recommends that
Plaintiffs Complaint be dismissed with
prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
BACKGROUND AND STATEMENT OF FACTS
Terra Fields initiated this action pro se in Hennepin County
District Court on February 3, 2017, by mailing a copy of a
Complaint to Defendant Strom Engineering Corporation. (Notice
of Removal, Exh. A, [Docket No. 1-1], 1-6). Defendant is a
Minnesota Corporation with its principle executive office in
Hennepin County; Defendant provides temporary staffing
services throughout the United States. - (Id. at
1-2). Plaintiff resides in Mississippi and is a former
employee of Defendant. (Id.).
Complaint alleges that after she. prevailed in a previous
lawsuit against Defendant, it then engaged in unlawful
retaliation against her in violation of Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 and it also engaged in unlawful
reprisal in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act
("MHRA"). (IcL at 3-4). In addition, Plaintiff
alleges that Defendant falsely reported income to the IRS,
which led to a tax lien being placed on Plaintiffs home.
(Id. at 1-3). Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief,
compensatory damages, treble damages under the MHRA,
attorney's fees and costs, and declaratory judgment.
(Id. at 4).
February 28, 2017, Defendant removed the case to this Court
on the basis of federal question jurisdiction, and Defendant
filed its Answer. ([Docket Nos. 1 and 3]). The same day,
Defendant mailed a copy of the removal documents to Plaintiff
at her address in Mississippi. ([Docket No. 5).
3, 2017, the Undersigned held a Pretrial Conference, which
Plaintiff did not attend. ([Docket No. 11]).
5, 2017, the Undersigned issued the Pretrial Scheduling
Order. ([Docket No. 12]).
15, 2017, Defendant served Plaintiff by United States Mail
with its First Requests for Production of Documents. (Mem.,
[Docket No. 15], 1, 3; Viksnins Aff., [Docket No, 16], 1,
3-7). The same day, Defendant also sent Plaintiff a partially
completed form (Tax Form 8821) authorizing the IRS to release
her tax returns to Defendant; Defendant asked that Plaintiff
sign and date the form and return it. (Mem., [Docket No. 15],
2, 4; Viksnins Aff, Exh. 1, [Docket No. 16-1], 2, 8).
did not respond to the discovery requests, communicate with
defense counsel, provide any documents, or sign the
authorization form. (Mem., [Docket No. 15], 2, 4). Plaintiff
also has not served Defendant with any written discovery
requests. (Id. at 3).
22, 2017, defense counsel sent Plaintiff a letter noting her
failure to provide discovery responses, explaining the
relevance of the requested discovery, and stating that if
Defendant did not receive the requested documents by July 3,
2017, Defendant would bring a motion to compel. (Id.
at 4; Viksnins Aff., Exh, 2, [Docket No, 16-1], 11-12). The
letter also asked Plaintiff to inform defense counsel if she
no longer intended to pursue the case, and if such was the
case, defense counsel would prepare a stipulation of
dismissal. (Mem., [Docket No. 15], 4; Viksnins Aff., Exh. 2,
[Docket No. 16-1], 11-12). Plaintiff has not responded to
this letter or communicated with defense counsel in any other
way. (Mem., [Docket No. 15], 4).
11, 2017, Defendant filed a Motion to Compel Discovery,
[Docket No. 13], asking the Court to order Plaintiff to
produce responsive documents and a signed copy of the tax
authorization form within 14 days of the Court's Order,
(Mem., [Docket No. 15], 5-6).
12, 2017, the Undersigned issued an Order instructing
Plaintiff to file and serve her response to the Motion to
Compel by no later than July 19, 2017, and the Court
scheduled a Hearing on the Motion. ([Docket No. 18]).
Plaintiff did not respond, and she did not appear at ...