REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
MARY ALICE THEILER, Chief Magistrate Judge.
This is a civil rights action filed under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff, through counsel, filed her complaint on November 8, 2012. Plaintiff alleged in her complaint that she had been denied adequate medical care as she gave birth at the King County Correctional Facility in July 2011, in violation of her rights under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. (Dkt. 1.) Defendants filed an answer to the complaint and the undersigned thereafter entered an Order setting pretrial deadlines. (Dkts. 7 and 8.) On March 18, 2013, the parties filed an agreed motion to stay the proceedings for three months due to the incapacity of plaintiff's medical expert. (Dkt. 12.) The undersigned granted the motion and entered an Order staying the case until June 21, 2013. (Dkt. 14.)
On June 20, 2013, the parties filed a stipulated motion requesting that the case be stayed for an additional three months due to the continued incapacity of the plaintiff's medical expert. (Dkt. 16.) The undersigned again granted the motion and entered an Order staying the case until September 21, 2013. (Dkt. 18.) Pursuant to that Order, plaintiff's counsel was to update the Court, not later than September 21, 2013, on the medical prognosis of plaintiff's expert witness and his ability to participate in the case. Plaintiff's counsel failed to submit the required update and, thus, on October 10, 2013, the undersigned issued an Order directing plaintiff to show cause not later than October 21, 2013 why the previously entered stay should not be lifted and a new pretrial schedule be established. (Dkt. 19.)
On October 17, 2013, plaintiff's counsel filed a motion seeking to withdraw from the case. (Dkt. 20.) Counsel explained therein that the case was not longer economically viable because of the withdrawal from the case of plaintiff's medical expert who had been catastrophically injured in a car accident earlier this year. ( Id. ) Counsel indicated that they had served a copy of their motion to withdraw on plaintiff and that plaintiff had been advised that her failure to prosecute her claims could result in dismissal of this case. ( Id. ) The motion to withdraw was noted on the Court's calendar for consideration on November 1, 2013. ( Id. )
Plaintiff has filed no response to counsel's motion to withdraw nor has she indicated in any fashion that she intends to proceed with this action. Accordingly, this Court recommends that counsel's motion to withdraw be granted and that plaintiff's complaint, and this action, be dismissed at this time for failure to prosecute. This dismissal should be without prejudice to plaintiff re-filing the action at a later date so long as any such ...