Mark E. Ford

“the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 19) is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. The Commissioner's Motion to Remand (Doc. 17) is GRANTED, and the matter is REMANDED for further consideration pursuant to Sentence Four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”

“the Report and Recommendation is proper and is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY. Accordingly, the Commissioner's final decision is REVERSED, and this case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”

Ford's signed R&R, bearing '/s/ Mark E. Ford,' addressed a pro se prisoner Section 1983 case referred by Chief Judge Hickey. After two generous extensions and two show-cause orders, Ford recommended sua sponte dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute and comply with court orders. The recommendation shows his practice of giving pro se litigants repeated chances before recommending dismissal.

“Accordingly, the Commissioner’s final decision is REVERSED, and this case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further consideration pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).”

“The Plaintiff’s Motion (Doc. 19) is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff is awarded the sum of $8,220.45.”

“Accordingly, the Court finds that Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 38) should be and hereby is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s case is hereby DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

“this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to hear her Motion challenging the execution of her federal sentence. Accordingly, Smith’s Motion for Jail Credit Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) filed on April 15, 2026 (ECF No. 202) is DENIED.”

“Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Reopen (ECF No. 12) be DENIED and Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (ECF No. 4) be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.”

“IT IS ORDERED that the R&R is ADOPTED IN ITS ENTIRETY, and Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 50) in the 2110 Case is GRANTED. The Amended Complaint in the 2110 Case and the Second Amended Complaint in the 2089 Case are both DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

The court dismissed the claimant's Social Security action without prejudice after a deficiency notice and a show-cause order failed to produce either the filing fee or an application to proceed without prepayment. No party motion was resolved, so the order is excluded from motion statistics.

“reopening the discovery period will not cure the defects in Plaintiff’s case. Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Reopen Discovery (ECF No. 103) is hereby DENIED.”

“Because Plaintiff is not a licensed attorney, she cannot satisfy the requirements of either Rule 23(a) or Rule 23(g). She can, therefore, only bring the claims raised in her individual capacity and not on behalf of a class.”

“The Court finds that the inclusion of Kori Nooner as a defendant in the case would be futile.”

“Accordingly, Defendants' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (ECF No. 44) is hereby GRANTED. Plaintiff’s Title VII claims against Separate Defendants Al Rajabi and Jason Engle are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and Plaintiff’s § 1983 claims against all Defendants are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”