Multistar Industries v. Gettel Ocala et al

Filing 68

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE. Pursuant to Rule 41 and the Parties notification that the case has settled, this action is DISMISSED with prejudice and without an award of fees or costs to either party. The file is CLOSED. Signed by Judge Thomas O. Rice. (LLH, Courtroom Deputy)

Case 2:19-cv-00182-TOR

ECF No. 68

filed 06/04/21

PageID.845 Page 1 of 3

1
2
3
4
5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

MULTISTAR INDUSTRIES, a
Washington corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.

NO: 2:19-CV-0182-TOR
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH
PREJUDICE

GENERAL MOTORS, LLC, a
Delaware Corporation headquartered in
Detroit, Michigan and registered to do
business in Washington as a foreign
corporation,
Defendant.

14
15

BEFORE THE COURT is the Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 67). The

16

Court has reviewed the record and files herein, and is fully informed.

17

On or about February 17, 2021, the Parties notified the Court that this matter had

18

been settled. See Order at ECF No. 63. The Court cancelled the jury trial which

19

was scheduled for March 8, 2021. The Parties were directed to file a stipulated

20

motion to dismiss and if such motion was not filed, the Court would hold a

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE ~ 1

Case 2:19-cv-00182-TOR

ECF No. 68

filed 06/04/21

PageID.846 Page 2 of 3

1

telephonic status conference. Id. The telephonic status conference was continued

2

three times to allow the parties to finalize the settlement and submit the stipulated

3

motion to dismiss. A telephonic status conference was scheduled for May 19,

4

2021. ECF No. 66. On May 19, 2021, neither party attended the scheduled

5

telephonic status conference at 8:15 a.m., nor did they file a stipulated motion to

6

dismiss. Accordingly, the Court Ordered the Parties to show cause, on or before

7

June 2, 2021, why this case should not be dismissed with prejudice and without an

8

award of fees or costs to either party. ECF No. 67.

9

Once again, neither party has responded to the Court’s Order. Having been

10

informed that the Parties have settled this case, the Court finds that the Parties no

11

longer have an interest in continuing this litigation. Plaintiff certainly has failed to

12

prosecute this matter since informing the Court that the matter has settled.

13

The Court has weighed the factors required to be considered prior to dismissal.

14

Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988) (quoting five factors listed in

15

Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 142, 1423 (9th Cir. 1986)). It would be absurd to

16

require this Court to hold this case in abeyance indefinitely waiting to see if the

17

Parties would someday file a stipulated motion to dismiss.

18

//

19

//

20

//

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE ~ 2

Case 2:19-cv-00182-TOR

1

ECF No. 68

filed 06/04/21

PageID.847 Page 3 of 3

ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

2

Pursuant to Rule 41 and the Parties’ notification that the case has settled, this

3

action is DISMISSED with prejudice and without an award of fees or costs

4

to either party.

5

The District Court Executive is directed to enter this Order and Judgment of

6
7

Dismissal, furnish copies to counsel, and CLOSE the file.
DATED June 4, 2021.

8
9
10

THOMAS O. RICE
United States District Judge

11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE ~ 3