Lillard v. Colvin

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-01279

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 3/10/16.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 ANDREALIUS QUINCY LILLARD, 7 Case No. 15-cv-01279-KAW Plaintiff, 8 ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 9 CAROLYN W. COLVIN, 10 Defendant. 11 12 Northern District of California United States District Court 13 On August 27, 2015, the Court granted Plaintiff's counsel's motion to withdraw as counsel 14 of record, and extended Plaintiff's time to file a motion for summary judgment to October 12, 15 2015. (Dkt. No. 16.) Therein, the Court provided Plaintiff with the contact information for the 16 Federal Pro Bono Project's Help Desk, as well as the district court's manual for pro se litigants, to 17 assist him in representing himself. To date, Plaintiff has not filed a motion for summary 18 judgment. 19 On November 25, 2015, Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment and/or dismissal 20 for failure to prosecute. (Dkt. No. 17.) Plaintiff did not file an opposition. On January 15, 2016, 21 the Court issued an order to show cause to Plaintiff to explain why the case should not be 22 dismissed for failure to prosecute, and ordered him to file both a written response to the order to 23 show cause and either an opposition and cross-motion for summary judgment or a notice of non- 24 opposition to Defendant's motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 19.) The response deadline 25 was February 19, 2016. Id. On January 18, 2016, pursuant to Civil Local Rule 11-5(b), the order to 26 show cause was served on Plaintiff via U.S. Mail by his former attorney. (Dkt. No. 20.) To date, 27 Plaintiff has not responded to the OSC nor has he filed any documents in connection with his case. 28 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits the involuntary dismissal of an action or 1 claim for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute. See Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 2 (1962) ("authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution has generally been 3 considered an 'inherent power'"). Unless otherwise stated, a dismissal under Rule 41(b) "operates 4 as an adjudication on the merits." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 5 In light of the foregoing, the case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. 6 Plaintiff's former counsel shall serve a copy of this order on Plaintiff at his last known 7 address. 8 IT IS SO ORDERED. 9 Dated: March 10, 2016 __________________________________ 10 KANDIS A. WESTMORE 11 United States Magistrate Judge 12 Northern District of California United States District Court 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2