Ross v. Brown et al

Filing 20

ORDER. IT THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice for Plaintiff'sfailure to comply with the Notice of Intent to Dismiss 17 . The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close the case. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 6/3/15. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - TR)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

7
8
9

ROBERT M. ROSS,
Plaintiff,

10
vs.

11
12

Case No.: 2:14-CV-00310-RCJ-VCF
ORDER

STEPHEN BROWN, et al.,
Defendants.

13
14
15

On April 6, 2015 a Notice of Intent to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution Pursuant to

16

Local Rule 41-1 (ECF #17) was entered with the Court. The Notice advised that if no action

17

is taken in this case by May 6, 2015, the Court will dismiss this action for want of prosecution.

18

Plaintiff has not complied within the allotted time period.

19

“Before dismissing the action, the district court is required to weigh several factors: (1)

20

the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its

21

docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of

22

cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions.” Ghazali v. Moran, 46

23

F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (internal citations and quotations omitted). All five factors point in

24

favor of dismissal.
Plaintiff has failed to show good cause why this action should not be dismissed without

25
26

prejudice for want of prosecution pursuant to Local Rule 41-1.

27

///

28

///

1

IT THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED with prejudice for Plaintiff’s

2

failure to comply with the Notice of Intent to Dismiss (ECF #17). The Clerk of the Court shall

3

enter judgment accordingly and close the case.

4

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5

DATED this 3rd day of June, 2015.

6
7

ROBERT C. JONES
United States District Judge

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-