KIM-NGOC THI NGUYEN v. CARLOS DEL TORO

Filing 27

MEMORANDUM OPINION. This action is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Defendant's 26 motion to stay discovery deadlines is denied as moot. See document for details. The Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of the opinion and accompanying order to Plaintiff's two last known addresses, which were included in her counsel's motion to withdraw. Signed by Judge Amir H. Ali on 3/12/2025. (lcaha2)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

KIM-NGOC THI NGUYEN,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 23-01154 (AHA)

v.
TERENCE EMMERT, Acting Secretary, U.S.
Department of the Navy, 1
Defendant.

Memorandum Opinion
Plaintiff Kim-Ngoc Thi Nguyen filed this employment discrimination action in April 2023.
After motions practice and the filing of an answer, counsel for Nguyen moved to withdraw in
November 2024. ECF No. 23. Counsel mailed and emailed Nguyen a copy of the motion to
withdraw, advising her to retain new counsel and to notify the Court in writing within seven days
if she intended to continue the case pro se. ECF No. 23-2. Nguyen did not do so. The Court
scheduled a conference for January 10, 2025, and directed Nguyen to personally appear along with
her counsel. Min. Order (Dec. 30, 2024). Counsel made several attempts to notify Nguyen of the
conference, but she did not appear. See ECF No. 25. The Court granted counsel’s motion to
withdraw and ordered Nguyen to advise the Court by February 10, 2025, whether she intended to
retain new counsel or to proceed pro se. Min. Order (Jan. 13, 2025). The Court warned that if
Nguyen failed to advise the Court of how she intended to proceed, the action could be dismissed
for failure to prosecute. Id. Nguyen has not responded to the Court’s order.

1

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 25(d), Acting Secretary of the Navy Terence Emmert
is “automatically substituted” as the defendant.

The Court may dismiss a case for failure to prosecute “upon the Court’s own motion.”
Local Civ. R. 83.23; see Peterson v. Archstone Cmtys. LLC, 637 F.3d 416, 418 (D.C. Cir. 2011)
(“District courts have inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for a plaintiff’s failure to
prosecute or otherwise comply with a court order.”). Here, Nguyen failed to comply with the
Court’s order that she appear at the January 10 conference. She has also failed to respond to the
Court’s order directing her to advise the Court whether she intends to proceed pro se, despite the
deadline having passed over a month ago and despite the Court’s warning that her case could be
dismissed. The Court accordingly dismisses this action without prejudice for failure to prosecute.
See, e.g., Hatton v. Mehrotra, No. 22-cv-1587, 2022 WL 17146752, at *1 (D.D.C. Nov. 22, 2022).
Defendant’s motion to stay discovery deadlines, ECF No. 26, is denied as moot.
A separate order consistent with this decision accompanies this memorandum opinion. The
Clerk of Court is directed to mail a copy of the opinion and order to Nguyen’s two last known
addresses, which were included in her counsel’s motion to withdraw.

AMIR H. ALI
United States District Judge
Date: March 12, 2025

2