Puckett v. Steadman et al
Filing
13
ORDER DISMISSING Action, Without Prejudice, for Failure to Prosecute, signed by Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto on 2/25/2015. CASE CLOSED. (Marrujo, C)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
9
10
DURRELL PUCKETT,
11
Plaintiff,
v.
12
13
T. W. STEADMAN, et al.,
14
Case No. 1:13-cv-00834-SKO (PC)
ORDER DISMISSING ACTION,
WITHOUT PREJUDICE, FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
(Doc. 10)
Defendants.
_____________________________________/
15
16
Plaintiff Durrell Puckett, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed
17 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on June 3, 2013. On December 31, 2014, the
18 Court issued an order authorizing service of Plaintiff’s amended complaint, and requiring Plaintiff
19 to fill out and return the USM-285 forms and summonses within thirty days. (Doc. 10.) More
20 than thirty days have passed and Plaintiff has not complied with or otherwise responded to the
21 order.
22
The Court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that
23 power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los
24 Angeles Cnty., 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000). In determining whether to dismiss an action for
25 failure to comply with a pretrial order, the Court must weigh “(1) the public’s interest in
26 expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of
27 prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and
28 (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions.”
In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Products
1 Liability Litig., 460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal quotations and citations omitted).
2 These factors guide a court in deciding what to do, and are not conditions that must be met in
3 order for a court to take action. Id. (citation omitted).
4
Based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with or otherwise respond to the order, this action
5 shall be dismissed. Id. This action, which has been pending since 2013, can proceed no further
6 without Plaintiff’s cooperation and compliance with the order at issue, and the action cannot
7 simply remain idle on the Court’s docket, unprosecuted. Id. Accordingly, this action is HEREBY
8 DISMISSED for failure to prosecute, without prejudice.
9
10
11
12
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:
February 25, 2015
/s/ Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?