Keybank National Association v. Leon R. Baker Farms, LLC, et al.

Filing 73

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE. Signed by Judge Rosanna Malouf Peterson. (VR, Courtroom Deputy)

FILED IN THE
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

1

Feb 06, 2019

2

SEAN F. MCAVOY, CLERK

3
4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

5

EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

6
7
8

CHS INC, a Minnesota cooperative
corporation,

9

Third Party Plaintiff,

10
11

NO: 2:17-CV-197-RMP

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT
PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE

v.
JORDAN BAKER and JANE
BAKER,

12
Third Party Defendants.
13
14

CHS INC, a Minnesota cooperative
corporation,

15
Cross Claimant,
16
17
18

LEON R. BAKER; LESLIE N.
BAKER; LORI J. BAKER; LEON R.
BAKER FARMS, LLC; JAMES
LEON BAKER; REID T. BAKER;
and LORRAINE BAKER,

19
Cross Defendants.
20
21
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE ~ 1

1

On August 17, 2018, the Court entered an Order Granting Plaintiff Keystone

2

National Bank’s Motions for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 62, leaving CHS, Inc. as

3

the Third-Party Plaintiff/Cross Claimant in this matter. A five (5) day jury trial is

4

scheduling to commence on February 25, 2019, with a pretrial conference scheduled

5

for February 12, 2019.

6

In early October 2018, Third-Party Plaintiff/Cross Claimant CHS Inc.

7

indicated via email with the Court that this matter would be resolved by late

8

October 2018. However, because there has been no further communication from

9

CHS, the Court entered an Order to File Status Report on January 23, ECF No. 27,

10

directing Third-Party Plaintiff/Cross Claimant CHS, Inc. to file a written status

11

report, within ten days, regarding whether it is anticipated that this case will

12

proceed to trial. As of today’s date, nothing further has been filed, nor has there

13

been any further communication with the Court from the parties.

14

If a litigant fails to prosecute its crossclaims, the Court may dismiss those

15

claims. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); 41(c). Dismissal for failure to prosecute is within

16

the discretion of the district court. Lal v. California, 610 F.3d 518, 523 (9th Cir.

17

2010).

18

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

19

1. Third-Party Plaintiff/Cross Claimant CHS Inc claims are dismissed

20

without prejudice and without costs to any party for failure to prosecute the

21

case.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE ~ 2

1

2. All pending motions, if any, are DENIED AS MOOT.

2

3. All scheduled court hearings, if any, are STRICKEN.

3

IT IS SO ORDERED. The District Court Clerk is directed to enter this

4
5

Order, provide copies to counsel, and close this case.
DATED February 6, 2019.

6
7

s/ Rosanna Malouf Peterson
ROSANNA MALOUF PETERSON
United States District Judge

8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO
PROSECUTE ~ 3