Gray v. Longcor

Filing 7

ORDER DISMISSING Action, without Prejudice for Failure to Obey a Court Order and Failure to Prosecute, signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 04/08/2015. CASE CLOSED (Martin-Gill, S)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
BERNADETTE GRAY,

10

Plaintiff,

11
12

v.

13

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION, WITHOUT
PREJUDICE, FOR FAILURE TO OBEY A
COURT ORDER AND FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE

E. LONGCOR,

14

Case No. 1:14-cv-02059-LJO-SKO (PC)

Defendant.
_____________________________________/

(Doc. 4)
15
Plaintiff Bernadette Gray, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed

16

17 this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 on December 24, 2014. On January 5, 2015,
18 the Court struck Plaintiff’s unsigned complaint and ordered Plaintiff to file a signed complaint
19 within thirty days. Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(a); Local Rule 131. Plaintiff was warned that if she failed to
20 comply, this action would be dismissed, without prejudice, for failure to obey a court order. More
21 than thirty days have passed, and Plaintiff has not complied with or otherwise responded to the
1
22 order.

The Court has the inherent power to control its docket and may, in the exercise of that

23

24 power, impose sanctions where appropriate, including dismissal of the action. Bautista v. Los
25 Angeles Cnty., 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000). In determining whether to dismiss an action,
26 the Court must weigh “(1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the
27 court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy
28

1

The order was re-served on February 6, 2015.

1 favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions.” In
2 re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Prod. Liab. Litig., 460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006) (internal
3 quotations and citations omitted). These factors guide a court in deciding what to do, and are not
4 conditions that must be met in order for a court to take action. Id. (citation omitted).
5

Based on Plaintiff’s failure to comply with or otherwise respond to the Court’s order, the

6 Court is left with no alternative but to dismiss the action for failure to prosecute. Id. This action
7 can proceed no further without Plaintiff’s cooperation and compliance with the order at issue, and
8 the action cannot simply remain idle on the Court’s docket, unprosecuted. Id. Accordingly, this
9 action is HEREBY DISMISSED, without prejudice, for failure to obey a court order and failure to
10 prosecute.
11
12
13

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated:

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill

April 8, 2015

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2