Rodriquez v. Carl Warren & Company et al

Filing 26

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION to Dismiss Complaint. Objections to R&R due by 3/7/2010 Signed by Magistrate Judge Peggy A. Leen on 2/16/10. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ASB)

1 2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 4 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's failure to respond to this court's Order to Show Cause (Dkt. #23) entered December 14, 2009. The court makes the following findings: 1. On November 3, 2009, the court entered an Order (Dkt. #19) granting Qumars Behzadi's JESUS RODRIGUEZ, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) CARL WARREN & COMPANY, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________)

Case No. 2:09-cv-01360-PMP-PAL REPORT OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

Motion to Withdraw as Attorney (Dkt. #18). The court directed Plaintiff to either retain new counsel or file a statement he would proceed pro se before November 30, 2009. 2. Plaintiff did not comply with this Order (Dkt. #19) or request an extension of time in

which to do so. 3. The Order (Dkt. #19) was mailed to Plaintiff, and it was returned to the court as

undeliverable. The Clerk of the Court was unable to re-mail it because Plaintiff had not provided the court with his new address. 4. On December 14, 2009, the court entered an Order to Show Cause (Dkt. #23) because

Plaintiff had not retained new counsel or filed a statement that he would proceed pro se. The court ordered Plaintiff to show cause in writing by December 28, 2009 why sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to comply with the court's Order (Dkt. #19). 5. The court noted in the Order to Show Cause (Dkt. #23) that the Order (Dkt. #19) had

been returned as undeliverable. The court advised Plaintiff of his duty to keep the court and the parties ///

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

to this litigation apprised of his current address. See Order, Dkt. #19. The court ordered Plaintiff to provide written notification of his new address to the court no later than December 28, 2009. Id. 6. The court warned Plaintiff that "[f]ailure to comply with this order may result in the

recommendation to the District Judge that this case be dismissed." Id. at 2:3-4. 7. Plaintiff did not comply with the court's Order to Show Cause (Dkt. #23). He did not

show cause in writing, nor did he provide the court with written notification of his new address. He did not request an extension of time in which to comply. 8. Plaintiff's willful failure to comply with the court's Orders (Dkt. ##19, 23) is an abusive

litigation practice has interfered with the court's ability to hear this case, delayed litigation, disrupted the court's timely management of its docket, wasted judicial resources, and threatened the integrity of the court's orders and the orderly administration of justice. Sanctions less drastic than dismissal are unavailable because Plaintiff has wilfully refused to comply with multiple court orders. Under these circumstances, IT IS RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff's Complaint be DISMISSED. Dated this 16th day of February, 2010.

___________________________________ PEGGY A. LEEN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

2