Chapman v. Mott's LLP

1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
CRYSTAL S. CHAPMAN,
Plaintiff,
v.
MOTT’S LLP,
Defendant.
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Civil No. 1:23-CV-01498
Judge Jennifer P. Wilson
MEMORANDUM
Before the court is the report and recommendation of Chief United States
Magistrate Judge Daryl F. Bloom recommending that the court grant Defendant’s
motion to dismiss for failure to prosecute and dismiss this case with prejudice.
(Doc. 43.) Chief Judge Bloom conducts a thorough analysis of each Poulis factor
and finds that all weigh in favor of dismissing this action. (Id.) Plaintiff filed an
objection containing four sentences wherein she states that she opposes dismissal,
responded to Defendant’s discovery, the court already ruled on her claim, and that
Defendant violated her right to FMLA. (Doc. 45.) The court will liberally
construe this as general objection to the report and recommendation. Defendant
opposes the objection arguing that Plaintiff provided no factual or legal support for
her statements. (Doc. 46.)
When a party raises only general objections to a report and recommendation,
a district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of the report and
Case 1:23-cv-01498-JPW Document 47 Filed 02/17/26 Page 1 of 2

2
recommendation. Goney v. Clark, 749 F.2d 5, 6–7 (3d Cir. 1984). “To obtain de
novo determination of a magistrate’s findings by a district court, 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1) requires both timely and specific objections to the report.” Id. at 6.
Thus, when reviewing general objections to a report and recommendation, the
court’s review is limited “to ascertaining whether there is ‘clear error’ or ‘manifest
injustice’” on the face of the record. Boomer v. Lewis, No. 3:06-CV-00850, 2009
WL 2900778, at *1 (M.D. Pa. Sept. 9, 2009).
The court has reviewed Chief Judge Bloom’s report and recommendation
and finds no clear error or manifest injustice on the face of the record. The
objection, at best, expresses disagreement with Chief Judge Bloom’s analysis but
does not address the Poulis factors. Accordingly, the court will adopt the report
and recommendation, Doc. 46, grant Defendant’s motion to dismiss, Doc. 39, and
dismiss this action with prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to prosecute this case. An
appropriate order will follow.
s/Jennifer P. Wilson
JENNIFER P. WILSON
United States District Judge
Middle District of Pennsylvania
Dated: February 17, 2026
Case 1:23-cv-01498-JPW Document 47 Filed 02/17/26 Page 2 of 2