McGill v. The Home Depot, Inc.

Northern District of California, cand-4:2015-cv-03029

ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 4/20/16.

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 JOSEPH G. MCGILL, 7 Case No. 15-cv-03029-KAW Plaintiff, 8 ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 9 THE HOME DEPOT, INC., 10 Defendant. 11 12 Northern District of California United States District Court 13 On January 22, 2016, the Court granted Plaintiff Joseph G. McGill's counsel's motion to 14 withdraw on the grounds that Plaintiff failed to communicate despite counsel's efforts to reach 15 him using various forms of communication since April 2015. (Dkt. No. 32.) 16 On March 8, 2016, the Court held a case management conference, at which Plaintiff did 17 not appear. (See Dkt. No. 35.) On March 11, 2016, the Court issued an order to show cause to 18 Plaintiff to explain why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute, and to explain 19 why he did not attend the March 8, 2016 case management conference. (Dkt. No. 36.) Therein, 20 Court provided Plaintiff with the contact information for the Federal Pro Bono Project's Help 21 Desk, as well as the district court's manual for pro se litigants, to assist him in representing 22 himself. Id. The response deadline was March 31, 2016. Id. On March 21, 2016, pursuant to Civil 23 Local Rule 11-5(b), the order to show cause was served on Plaintiff via U.S. Mail by his former 24 attorney. (Dkt. No. 37.) To date, Plaintiff has not responded to the OSC nor has he filed any 25 documents in connection with his case. 26 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits the involuntary dismissal of an action or 27 claim for a plaintiff's failure to prosecute. See Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630-31 28 (1962) ("authority of a court to dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution has generally been 1 considered an 'inherent power'"). Unless otherwise stated, a dismissal under Rule 41(b) "operates 2 as an adjudication on the merits." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 3 In light of the foregoing, the case is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. 4 Plaintiff's former counsel shall serve a copy of this order on Plaintiff at his last known 5 address. 6 IT IS SO ORDERED. 7 Dated: April 20, 2016 __________________________________ 8 KANDIS A. WESTMORE 9 United States Magistrate Judge 10 11 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