KMI Zeolite, Inc. v. United States Department of the Interior, et al.
Filing
176
ORDER. IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the parties shall file a dispositive motion, stipulation to dismiss, or other appropriate motion within seven (7) days of this order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shallif they do not file a dispositive motion, stipulation to dismiss or other appropriate motionfile a status report and show cause why this matter should not be dismissed in its entirety within seven (7) days of this order. Signed by Judge James C. Mahan on 2/21/2020. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - ADR)
1
2
3
4
5
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
6
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
7
***
8
KMI ZEOLITE, INC. et al.,
9
10
11
12
13
Case No. 2:15-CV-2038 JCM (NJK)
Plaintiff(s),
ORDER
v.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE
INTERIOR, et al.,
Defendant(s).
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
Presently before the court is the matter of KMI Zeolite, Inc. v. United States Department of
the Interior, et al., case number 2:15-cv-02038-JCM-NJK. On June 26, 2019, the court adopted
Magistrate Judge Koppe’s report and recommendation, granted Nye County’s motion to enforce
settlement, and dismissed defendant Nye County with prejudice. (ECF No. 175).
There is nothing pending before the court, but it appears that a variety of claims remain
unresolved in this case. Since this court’s order nearly a year ago, no party has filed any motions
or otherwise acted to prosecute its respective claims.
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) provides that “[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute or
to comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or any
claim against it.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Although this rule only references dismissal upon
defendant’s motion, the Supreme Court in Link v. Wabash R. Co. held as follows:
Neither the permissive language of the Rule—which merely
authorizes a motion by the defendant—nor its policy requires us to
conclude that it was the purpose of the Rule to abrogate the power
of courts, acting on their own initiative, to clear their calendars of
cases that have remained dormant because of the inaction or
dilatoriness of the parties seeking relief. The authority of a court to
dismiss sua sponte for lack of prosecution has generally been
considered an ‘inherent power,’ governed not by rule or statute but
by the control necessarily vested in courts to manage their own
affairs so as to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of
cases.
1
2
3
4
Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 630–31 (1962).
5
6
7
8
9
The Supreme Court specifically affirmed “the power of courts, acting on their own
initiative, to clear their calendars of cases that have remained dormant because of the inaction or
dilatoriness of the parties seeking relief.” Id. at 630. Thus, Rule 41(b) authorizes district courts
to sua sponte dismiss actions for failure to prosecute or to comply with court orders or the
Rules. Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 640–43 (9th Cir. 2002);
10
11
12
13
This power is also codified in this court’s local rules. Local Rule 41-1 provides that “[a]ll
civil actions that have been pending in this court for more than 270 days without any proceeding
of record having been taken may, after notice, be dismissed for want of prosecution by the court
sua sponte or on the motion of an attorney or pro se party.” LR 41-1.
14
Accordingly,
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the parties shall file a
dispositive motion, stipulation to dismiss, or other appropriate motion within seven (7) days of this
order.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall—if they do not file a dispositive motion,
stipulation to dismiss or other appropriate motion—file a status report and show cause why this
matter should not be dismissed in its entirety within seven (7) days of this order.
DATED February 21, 2020.
22
23
__________________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
24
25
26
27
28
James C. Mahan
U.S. District Judge
-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?