Newbill v. U.S. Food and Drug Administration

1:25-cv-00723OhsdMar 10, 2026

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
CAROLYN NEWBILL, 	Case No. 1:25-cv-723
Plaintiff,
Dlott, J.
vs. 	Bowman, M.J.
U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINSTRATION,
Defendants
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
On December 29, 2025, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause, in writing, by
January 9, 2026, why Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint for Lack of
Subject Matter Jurisdiction and for Failure to State a Claim (Doc. 6) should not be
construed as unopposed and granted for the reasons stated. 	The Order further noted
that Plaintiff may also satisfy the requirements of this Order by filing a responsive
memorandum to Defendant’s motion by the January 9, 2026, deadline.
Plaintiff filed a response to the Show Cause Order on December 29, 2025. (Doc.
8). However, Plaintiff’s response was rambling and largely incoherent and appears to do
nothing more than restate the claims alleged against the Defendant in her Complaint. As
such, the Court found that Plaintiff’s response fails to specifically address the arguments
contained in Defendant’s motion to dismiss. (Doc. 6). Accordingly, on January 7, 2026,
the Court granted Plaintiff an additional 30 days in which to file formal opposition to
Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc. 9). Plaintiff was then Ordered to file her opposition
no later than February 6, 2026. Plaintiff was also put on notice that failure to file opposition
Case: 1:25-cv-00723-SJD-SKB Doc #: 10 Filed: 03/10/26 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>
to Defendant’s motion shall result in Defendant’s motion to dismiss being granted as
unopposed. (Doc. 9).
To date, Plaintiff has not filed a response in opposition to Defendant’s motions to
dismiss nor has she responded to the Court’s Order.
Plaintiff's failure to prosecute this matter and to obey an Order of the Court
warrants dismissal of this case pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). See Jourdan v. Jabe, 951
F.2d 108, 109–10 (6th Cir.1991). 	District courts have the power to sua sponte dismiss
civil actions for want of prosecution to “manage their own affairs so as to achieve the
orderly and expeditious disposition of cases.” Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 630–
31, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). See also Jourdan, 951 F.2d at 109. Though
plaintiff is proceeding pro se, as stated by the Supreme Court, “we have never suggested
that procedural rules in ordinary civil litigation should be interpreted so as to excuse
mistakes by those who proceed without counsel.” McNeil v. United States, 508 U.S. 106,
113 (1993).
Accordingly, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT Defendant’s motion to dismiss (Doc.
6) be GRANTED, and Plaintiff’s complaint be DISMISSED for the reasons stated in the
pending motion. In addition, Plaintiff’s complaint should also be dismissed based upon
Plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's Order and failure to prosecute this matter.
s/ Stephanie K. Bowman
Stephanie K. Bowman
United States Chief Magistrate Judge
Case: 1:25-cv-00723-SJD-SKB Doc #: 10 Filed: 03/10/26 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION
CAROLYN NEWBILL, 	Case No. 1:25-cv-723
Plaintiff,
Dlott, J.
vs. 	Bowman, M.J.
U.S. FOOD AND DRUG ADMINSTRATION,
Defendants
NOTICE
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), any party may serve and file specific, written
objections to this Report & Recommendation (“R&R”) within FOURTEEN (14) DAYS after
being served with a copy thereof. That period may be extended further by the Court on
timely motion by either side for an extension of time. 	All objections shall specify the
portion(s) of the R&R objected to, and shall be accompanied by a memorandum of law in
support of the objections. 	A party shall respond to an opponent’s objections within
FOURTEEN DAYS after being served with a copy of those objections. 	Failure to make
objections in accordance with this procedure may forfeit rights on appeal. See Thomas
v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985); United States v. Walters, 638 F.2d 947 (6th Cir. 1981).
Case: 1:25-cv-00723-SJD-SKB Doc #: 10 Filed: 03/10/26 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: <pageID>

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.