Kreslake v. Midland Credit Management, Inc.

Filing 25

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE 7 (Illston, Susan) (Filed on 9/30/2013) (Additional attachment(s) added on 9/30/2013: # 1 Certificate/Proof of Service) (tfS, COURT STAFF).

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9
United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15

No. C 13-02080 SI

LINDSAY KRESLAKE,

ORDER DISMISSING ACTION FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

Plaintiff,
v.
MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT INC.,
Defendant.

/

16
17

Pro se plaintiff Kreslake filed this suit against defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc., in

18

Alameda County Superior Court for “violation of FDCPA 5809 & violations of Rosenthal Act.” Compl.

19

at 2. On May 14, 2013, after the case was removed to this Court, defendant filed a motion to dismiss

20

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). The hearing was set for June 28, 2013, and

21

plaintiff’s opposition was due on May 30, 2013. Plaintiff did not file an opposition, nor did plaintiff

22

request an extension of time. Accordingly, the Court ordered plaintiff to show cause by no later than

23

June 28, 2013, why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Then, on June 26, 2013,

24

the Court’s order was returned as undeliverable to plaintiff’s address. A second order to show cause

25

issued on July 2, 2013, but it was not clear from the record whether plaintiff received it. Plaintiff

26

subsequently spoke with the courtroom deputy by telephone and provided two addresses at which she

27

could be reached. Plaintiff also provided a phone number on which she could be reached for the Case

28

Management Conference scheduled for September 13, 2013. However, plaintiff did not answer the

1

phone number she provided when called for the Case Management Conference, and the call went

2

straight to voicemail. On September 13, 2013, the Court issued plaintiff a Third Order to Show Cause,

3

requiring plaintiff to show cause in writing to be filed no later than September 27, 2013, why this case

4

should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 41(b). Plaintiff was also ordered

5

to file and serve an opposition to defendant’s motion to dismiss no later than September 27, 2013.

6

As of this date, plaintiff has neither responded to the Third Order to Show Cause, nor has she

7

contacted the Court to seek any extension of time. The Court, therefore, DISMISSES this action

8

without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Judgment shall be entered accordingly and the Clerk shall

9

close the file.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11

IT IS SO ORDERED.

12
13

Dated: September 30, 2013
SUSAN ILLSTON
United States District Judge

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