Smith v. Hunt & Henriques et al

Filing 17

ORDER DISMISSING CASE. Signed by Judge Lucy H. Koh on March 1, 2013. (lhklc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/1/2013)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

8

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

9

SAN JOSE DIVISION

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17

RAYMOND J. SMITH,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
HUNT & HENRIQUES, MICHAEL S. HUNT, )
and JANALIE HENRIQUES,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)

Case No.: 12-CV-04150-LHK
ORDER DISMISSING CASE

Plaintiff Raymond J. Smith (“Plaintiff”) filed his complaint on August 7, 2012 in the

18

instant matter. On August 30, 2012, Defendants filed their answer. ECF No. 4. A case

19

management conference was scheduled for February 6, 2013 at 2:00 p.m. ECF No. 10. The parties

20

were required to file a joint case management statement by January 30, 2013. Id. Defendants filed

21

a separate case management statement on February 1, 2013. ECF No. 11. Defendants stated that

22

they were not able to communicate with Plaintiff and therefore were unable to file a joint case

23

management statement. Plaintiff did not file a case management statement. Plaintiff also did not

24

appear at the February 6, 2013 case management conference.

25

In light of Plaintiff’s failure to file a case management statement and failure to appear at the

26

February 6, 2013 case management conference, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause, by

27

February 20, 2013, why this case should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute.

28

A hearing on the Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) was set for February 27, 2013 at 2:00 P.M.
1
Case No.: 11-CV-04150-LHK
ORDER DISMISSING CASE

1

Plaintiff was advised that, should Plaintiff fail to respond to this Order and to appear at the

2

February 27, 2013 hearing, Plaintiffs’ case would be dismissed with prejudice for failure to

3

prosecute.

4

On February 19, 2013 (11 days after the deadline), Plaintiff filed a response to the OSC.

5

See ECF No. 15. Plaintiff stated that Plaintiff was unable to prepare a case management statement

6

or participate in the case management conference because Plaintiff is suffering from physical

7

disabilities which were exacerbated by a case of the flu. Id. at 1-2. Plaintiff also contested

8

Defendants’ representation that that Defendants’ were not able to communicate with Plaintiff. Id.

9

at 3-4. Plaintiff did not appear at the February 27, 2013 OSC hearing.

United States District Court
For the Northern District of California

10

In light of Plaintiff’s failure to: (1) file a case management statement in advance of the

11

February 6, 2013 case management conference; (2) appear at the February 6, 2013 case

12

management conference; (3) file a timely response to the OSC; and (4) appear at the February 27,

13

2013 OSC hearing, the Court DISMISSES Plaintiff’s case. However, given that Plaintiff filed a

14

response to the OSC (albeit a late one), the Court’s dismissal is without prejudice. The Clerk shall

15

close the file.

16

IT IS SO ORDERED.

17

Dated: February __, 2013
March 1, 2013

_________________________________
LUCY H. KOH
United States District Judge

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Case No.: 11-CV-04150-LHK
ORDER DISMISSING CASE