Momchilovich-Arnce v. University of Arkansas et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
FAYETTEVILLE DIVISION
TAYLOR MOMCHILOVICH-ARNCE 	PLAINTIFF
v. 	Civil No. 25-5188
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS, ET AL 	DEFENDANTS
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
On September 9, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Complaint pursuant 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (ECF No.
1). By Order dated September 11, 2025, Plaintiff was ordered to file an Amended Complaint. (ECF
No. 5). On November 17, 2025, Plaintiff filed his Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 9).
On December 18, 2025, the undersigned recommended Plaintiff’s case be dismissed
because it failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (ECF No. 11). On January 6,
2026, Plaintiff filed a Motion to amend his Complaint. (ECF No. 15). By Order dated January 9,
2026, District Judge Susan O. Hickey declined to adopt the Report and Recommendation and
granted Plaintiff’s Motion to amend his Complaint. (ECF No. 16). Plaintiff was directed to file his
second Amended Complaint on or before February 9, 2026. To date, Plaintiff has not filed a second
Amended Complaint.
Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s case be DISMISSED without
prejudice on the grounds that he has failed to respond to a Court order. See Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(b).
The parties have fourteen (14) days from receipt of the Report and Recommendation in
which to file written objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The failure to file timely
objections may result in waiver of the right to appeal questions of fact. 	The parties are
Case 5:25-cv-05188-DCF Document 18 Filed 02/23/26 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

2
reminded that objections must be both timely and specific to trigger de novo review by the
district court.
RECOMMENDED this 23rd day of February 2026.
/s/_________________________________
CHRISTY COMSTOCK
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Case 5:25-cv-05188-DCF Document 18 Filed 02/23/26 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>