Laurencin v. Laurencin
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN LENNOX LAURENCIN, Plaintiff, v. DENNIS LAURENCIN, Individually and as Trustee of the Marie Distant Revocable Living Trust, Defendant. ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:16-cv-0076 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER1 THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Ruth Miller, filed on July 16, 2018, recommending dismissal of the complaint without prejudice but that Plaintiff be permitted to amend the complaint for failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 6.) The Court conducted a de novo review of the record and has made an independent determination finding no error.2 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 6, is APPROVED and ADOPTED as an Order of this Court as if fully set forth herein; it is further ORDERED that the Complaint filed on December 3, 2015, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff, however, is granted leave to amend the complaint within 21 days of the date of this Order. …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-3_16-cv-00076/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-3_16-cv-00076-1.pdf
SHA-256 9b93882f81e025d69880cd63831049392fa58fcc3ced267a9b58df87dc18b7cf
Re-using this document
two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-9b93882f81e0
Document text
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN LENNOX LAURENCIN, Plaintiff, v. DENNIS LAURENCIN, Individually and as Trustee of the Marie Distant Revocable Living Trust, Defendant. ) ) ) ) Case No. 3:16-cv-0076 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER1 THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation issued by Magistrate Judge Ruth Miller, filed on July 16, 2018, recommending dismissal of the complaint without prejudice but that Plaintiff be permitted to amend the complaint for failure to prosecute. (ECF No. 6.) The Court conducted a de novo review of the record and has made an independent determination finding no error.2 Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 6, is APPROVED and ADOPTED as an Order of this Court as if fully set forth herein; it is further ORDERED that the Complaint filed on December 3, 2015, ECF No. 1, is DISMISSED without prejudice. Plaintiff, however, is granted leave to amend the complaint within 21 days of the date of this Order. It is further 1 Due to the retirement of the judge previously assigned to this case, the undersigned, exercising his authority as Chief Judge of the District Court, reassigned this case to himself on February 17, 2026. 2 See Hill v. Barnacle, 655 Fed. Appx. 142, 148 (3d Cir. 2016) (opining that the district court is not required to make separate findings or conclusions when reviewing a Magistrate Judge’s report and recommendation de novo under 28 U.SC. § 636(b)) (citing Elmendorf Grafica, Inc. v. D.S. America, Inc., 48 F.3d 46, 49-50 (1st Cir. 1995) (opining that “[28 U.S.C. § 636(b)] authorizes the district court to adopt in whole as well as in part the proposed findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge. Where, as here, the magistrate judge decided on an undisputed factual record, the district court was certainly not required to rehash the magistrate judge’s reasoning. The role of the magistrate judge is ‘to relieve courts of unnecessary work.’”) (citations omitted). Case: 3:16-cv-00076-RAM-GAT Document #: 12 Filed: 03/04/26 Page 1 of 2 Laurencin v. Laurencin. Case No. 3:16-cr-0076 Order ORDERED that failure to file an amended complaint that cures the issues mentioned in the Report and Recommendation will result in this matter being CLOSED. It is further ORDERED that a copy of this Order shall be served on Lennox Laurencin at his last known address provided to the Court by certified mail return receipt requested and that a copy of the return receipt shall be filed on the docket. Dated: March 4, 2026 /s/ Robert A. Molloy _________ ROBERT A. MOLLOY Chief Judge Case: 3:16-cv-00076-RAM-GAT Document #: 12 Filed: 03/04/26 Page 2 of 2