McGill v. The Home Depot, Inc.
Filing
39
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore on 4/20/16. (sisS, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/20/2016)
1
2
3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
5
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
6
7
JOSEPH G. MCGILL,
Case No. 15-cv-03029-KAW
Plaintiff,
8
ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR
FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
v.
9
10
THE HOME DEPOT, INC.,
Defendant.
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
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
6
7
address.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: April 20, 2016
__________________________________
KANDIS A. WESTMORE
United States Magistrate Judge
8
9
10
United States District Court
Northern District of California
11
12
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?