Chavez v. Travelers Property Casualty Insurance Company

Filing 38

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Craig M. Kellison on 5/16/16 ORDERING that this action is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with court rules and orders; and the Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file. CASE CLOSED(Becknal, R)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

JULIE CHAVEZ,

12
13
14
15
16

Plaintiff,
vs.

ORDER

TRAVELERS PROPERTY
CASUALTY INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Defendant.

17
18

No. 2:14-CV-2327-CMK

/
Plaintiff, who is proceeding pro se, brings this civil action. Pursuant to the written

19

consent of all parties, this case is before the undersigned as the presiding judge for all purposes,

20

including entry of final judgment. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).

21

Plaintiff failed to appear at a scheduling/status conference on December 16, 2015,

22

and, on January 20, 2016, the court directed plaintiff to show cause within 30 days why this

23

action should not be dismissed. That order, mailed to plaintiff’s address of record, was returned

24

undelivered with a note that plaintiff had moved and left no forwarding address. To date,

25

plaintiff has not responded to the order to show cause or otherwise communicated with the court

26

regarding the status of this case.
1

1

The court must weigh five factors before imposing the harsh sanction of

2

dismissal. See Bautista v. Los Angeles County, 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000); Malone v.

3

U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987). Those factors are: (1) the public's

4

interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court's need to manage its own docket;

5

(3) the risk of prejudice to opposing parties; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on

6

their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. See id.; see also Ghazali v. Moran,

7

46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam). A warning that the action may be dismissed as an

8

appropriate sanction is considered a less drastic alternative sufficient to satisfy the last factor.

9

See Malone, 833 F.2d at 132-33 & n.1.

10

In this case, plaintiff has made no effort to explain her failure to appear at the

11

December 16, 2015, hearing. Additionally, it appears that plaintiff has moved and not advised

12

the court of her new address. Given the foregoing, and in light of repeated warning to plaintiff

13

concerning the consequences of failing to prosecute this action or comply with court rules and

14

orders, the court finds that dismissal of the action is now appropriate.

15

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

16

1.

17
18

This action is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of prosecution and

failure to comply with court rules and orders; and
2.

The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment and close this file.

19
20
21
22

DATED: May 16, 2016
______________________________________
CRAIG M. KELLISON
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

23
24
25
26
2