Heredia v. Boyd

Filing 25

Order of Dismissal for Failure to Prosecute signed by Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd on 2/21/2017. The Clerk is instructed to close the file in this matter. (hrllc3S, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/21/2017)

Download PDF
E-filed 2/21/2017 1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 ERNESTO M. HEREDIA, Plaintiff, 8 9 10 United States District Court Northern District of California 11 12 v. Case No.16-cv-04031-HRL ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE Re: Dkt. Nos. 23, 24 ANA BOYD, Defendant. Pro se plaintiff Ernesto Heredia (“Heredia”) filed a complaint in this case on July 18, 2016. 13 Dkt. No. 1. Since that date, defendants filed a motion to dismiss, which Heredia failed to oppose. 14 Dkt. No. 9. The court granted the motion to dismiss with prejudice as to defendant Ana Boyd and 15 with leave to amend as to defendant West Valley Staffing Group (“WVSG”). Dkt. No. 21. 16 Heredia failed to file a First Amended Complaint, the deadline for which has passed. After 17 Heredia also failed to file a Case Management Statement, Dkt. No. 22, the court issued an order to 18 show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute on February 9, 2017. 19 Dkt. No. 23. The show cause order set a hearing date of February 21, 2017, and stated, in bold 20 text, “[i]f plaintiff fails to appear, the case will be dismissed for failure to prosecute.” Id. Heredia 21 failed to appear at the show cause hearing. Dkt. No. 24. All parties have consented to magistrate 22 judge jurisdiction. Dkt. Nos. 5, 16. 23 Having considered the five factors set forth in Malone v. United States Postal Service, 833 24 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987), the court has determined that notwithstanding the public policy 25 favoring the disposition of actions on their merits, the court's need to manage its docket and the 26 public interest in the expeditious resolution of the litigation require dismissal of this action. In 27 view of plaintiff's lack of response to this court's prior order(s), the court finds there is no 28 1 appropriate less drastic sanction. Accordingly, this action is dismissed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 2 41(b) for plaintiff's failure to prosecute. The Clerk is instructed to close the file in this matter. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: 2/21/2017 5 6 HOWARD R. LLOYD United States Magistrate Judge 7 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?