Jones v. Equifax et al
Filing
22
ORDER denying 20 Motion for Entry of Default; denying 21 Motion for Entry of Default. The parties shall conduct the IAC within seven(7) days of the entry of this Order. Signed by District Judge Robert J. Conrad, Jr on 5/20/16. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(tob)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
3:15-cv-00112-RJC-DSC
RODNEY JONES,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
EQUIFAX,
)
)
Defendant.
)
________________________________________ )
ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court sua sponte and upon Plaintiff’s Motions for Entry
of Default. (Doc. Nos. 20, 21).
Plaintiff filed his Complaint on March 6, 2015. (Doc. No. 1). The Court granted the pro
se Plaintiff IFP status, and summonses were issued by the Clerk of Court on May 19, 2015, for
service of the Complaint on Equifax, TransUnion, and Experian by the United States Marshal.
(Doc. Nos. 5, 6). The summons was returned executed as to Equifax on June 2, 2015, (Doc. No.
7), and Defendant Equifax filed its Answer in this case on June 15, 2015, (Doc. No. 10). However,
the summonses were returned unexecuted as to Experian and TransUnion on June 9, 2015, and
June 24, 2015, respectively. (Doc. Nos. 8, 12). On April 11, 2016, TransUnion and Experian were
dismissed from this case without prejudice due to Plaintiff’s failure to perfect service. (Doc. No.
19). On May 17, 2016, Plaintiff filed two Motions for Entry of Default as to TransUnion and
Experian. (Doc. Nos. 20, 21).
TransUnion and Experian have been dismissed from this action; therefore, Plaintiff’s
Motions for Entry of Default as to these two dismissed parties must be denied.
A Plaintiff has a general duty to prosecute his case, and a district court has the authority to
dismiss a plaintiff’s action because of his failure to prosecute or his failure to comply with a court
order, either upon a defendant’s motion or sua sponte. Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626,
629 (1962). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) provides as follows:
If 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. Unless the
dismissal order states otherwise, a dismissal under this subdivision (b) and any
dismissal not under this rule--except one for lack of jurisdiction, improper venue,
or failure to join a party under Rule 19—operates as an adjudication on the merits.
On April 13, 2016, the Court notified the parties of the requirement to conduct an Initial Attorney’s
Conference (“IAC”) within fourteen days and to file the Certificate of Initial Attorney’s
Conference (“CIAC”) within seven days of the conference. The CIAC was due by May 4, 2016;
however, no CIAC has been filed. It is Plaintiff’s burden to prosecute this case and move it
forward; yet, Plaintiff has done little to prosecute this case since filing the Complaint in March
2015. Accordingly, the Court hereby orders the parties to conduct the IAC within seven (7) days
of the entry of this Order and file the CIAC within seven (7) days of the conference or provide
good cause for the failure to do so.
Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Court’s orders constitutes a failure to prosecute. See
Link, 370 U.S. at 630 (stating that failure to prosecute case or comply with a court order authorizes
dismissal). Plaintiff is hereby warned that his failure to comply with this Order and to properly
prosecute this case going forward may result in the case being dismissed with prejudice and
without further notice.
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motions for Entry of Default, (Doc.
Nos. 20, 21), are DENIED. The deadlines associated with the IAC are hereby continued. The
parties shall conduct the IAC within seven (7) days of the entry of this Order and file the CIAC
within seven (7) days of the conference. Plaintiff is hereby warned that his failure to comply
with this Order or to properly prosecute this case going forward may result in the case
being dismissed with prejudice and without further notice.
Signed: May 20, 2016
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?