LANDON v. USA

Filing 7

Order of Dismissal. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment. Signed by Judge Marian Blank Horn. (dls) Copy to parties.

(}RI&$$BAI.
lJn tbe@nitt! 9rtntr.s @ourt of

ft[erul @lsfms

FILED
MAR

CAROLYN LANDON,

I

I 2015

U.S. COURTOF
FEDERALCI.AII6

Plaintiff,
v.

No. 124212C
Filed: March'19,2015

UNITED STATES,

Defendant'

ORDER
Plaintiff is one of twelve current or former employees of the united states
Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, employed in the Los Padres National Forest
in balifornia, wrro filed a complaint on January 19,2012, to recover $2,500,000.00 in
damages. The complaint brought by these plaintiffs was filed in the United States
DistriJt Court for the Central District of California on behalf of the plaintiffs by counsel
subsequenly, however, plaintiffs filed a stipulation of dismissal in that court, and the
District Couri dismissed the complaint, without prejudice. See Casev D. Allen. et al.. v.
Ed schafer. et al., No. 08-8391 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 8, 2009). when plainliff,s filed their
comola'nt '11 the United States Court of Federal Claims on January 19' 2012' they were
represented by different counsel. Plaintiffs' original attorney of record in this.court was
Michael D. Daniels. Subsequently, Bennett Rolfe, who was one of the original attorneys
in the District Court case, replaced Mr. Daniels as plaintiffs' counsel. After Mr. Rolfe
passed away, certain plaintiffs filed motions to represent themselves pro se, which the
court granted, continuing their cases pursuant to the initial complaint filed by the
olaintiffs in this court.

on october 7,2013, the court consolidated plaintiffs case with the eleven other

pro se plaintiffs. After consolation, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss count two in
this court
ii"in-tiff.' complaint, plaintiffs' breach of contract claims. On January 22,2015' plaintiffs'
two in .
issued an opinion in the above captioned cases dismissing count
complaint, ptiintitts' breach of contract claims. On February 4,2015, the court issued an
order instructing:

each plaintiff shall file with the court, and send copies to the defendant, a
notice indicating whether or not each such individual wishes to proceed
with count one of their complaint, the Fifth Amendment takings claims.
The notice shall be filed on or before Friday, February 20,2015. Plaintiffs
may consult private counsel or continue to proceed p1q .99' which is
curiently their status in the cases filed in this court. Plaintiffs also may

confer with counsel of record for the defendant prior to filing their notice of
whether or not they intend to proceed with their case. Although this court
order requires either a positive or negative notice of intent to proceed to

befi|edbyeachp|aintiff,fai|uretofi|einatime|ymannerwil|be

understood by the court as indication that the individual does not wish to
proceed and that the plaintiff's case should be dismissed'

For Ms. Landon, the court's order was returned as undeliverable. The clerk's
office, thereafter, sent the order to Ms. Landon's current address. The court noted,
f'o*"u"t, it is the obligation of the plaintiff, not the court, to keep plaintiff s information
court's
current. Although Ms. Landon failed to respond by February 20, 2015, in the
if she
March 2, 20ts-order, the court gave plaintiff another opportunity to indicate
wished to proceed. As indicated in the March 2,2015 Qrder'

As Ms. Landon did not receive a copy of the February 4,2015' on or
before Tuesday, March 17,2015' Ms. Landon may file a notice.of

whetherornotsheintendtoproceedwithhercase.Failuretofi|eby
March17,2015wi||beunderstoodbythecourtasindicationthatMs
Landondoesnotwishtoproceedandthathercaseshou|dbedismissed.
plaintiffs
As of March 19,2015, plaintiff has not filed a notice with the court Therefore,
claims are DlsMlssED, with prejudice. The clerk's office shall enter JUDGMENT
consistent with this Order'
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Judge