(PS) Iegorova v. Ojingwa ( 2020 )


Menu:
  • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 LIUDMYLA IEGOROVA, No. 2:19-cv-1552 JAM DB PS 12 Plaintiff, 13 v. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 14 ALEXANDER OJINGUA, 15 Defendant. 16 17 Plaintiff Liudmyla Iegorova has requested authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1915 to proceed in 18 forma pauperis. (ECF No. 2.) Plaintiff is proceeding in this action pro se. This matter was 19 referred to the undersigned in accordance with Local Rule 302(c)(21) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 20 On November 6, 2019, the Court received as undeliverable mail correspondence sent from 21 the Court. Pursuant to Local Rule 183 if a plaintiff fails to notify the Court within sixty-three 22 (63) days of a current address, the Court may dismiss the action without prejudice for failure to 23 prosecute. Local Rule 183(b). Here, the sixty-three-day deadline has long passed and plaintiff 24 has not provided a current address. 25 ANALYSIS 26 The factors to be weighed in determining whether to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution 27 are as follows: (1) the public interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need 28 to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendant; (4) the public policy favoring 1 disposition on the merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. Hernandez v. City of 2 El Monte, 138 F.3d 393, 398 (9th Cir. 1998); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 3 1992); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988). Dismissal is a harsh penalty that 4 should be imposed only in extreme circumstances. Hernandez, 138 F.3d at 398; Ferdik, 963 F.2d 5 at 1260. 6 Failure of a party to comply with the any order of the court “may be grounds for 7 imposition by the Court of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the 8 inherent power of the Court.” Local Rule 110. Any individual representing himself or herself 9 without an attorney is nonetheless bound by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Local 10 Rules, and all applicable law. Local Rule 183(a). A party’s failure to comply with applicable 11 rules and law may be grounds for dismissal or any other sanction appropriate under the Local 12 Rules. Id. 13 Here, plaintiff failed to comply with the Local Rules. Moreover, plaintiff has failed to 14 provide the Court with a current address. The Court provided plaintiff ample time to provide a 15 current address but plaintiff has failed to do so. 16 In this regard, plaintiff’s lack of prosecution of this case renders the imposition of 17 monetary sanctions futile. Moreover, the public interest in expeditious resolution of litigation, the 18 court’s need to manage its docket, and the risk of prejudice to the defendant all support the 19 imposition of the sanction of dismissal. Only the public policy favoring disposition on the merits 20 counsels against dismissal. However, plaintiff’s failure to prosecute the action in any way makes 21 disposition on the merits an impossibility. The undersigned will therefore recommend that this 22 action be dismissed due to plaintiff’s failure to prosecute as well as plaintiff’s failure to comply 23 with the Court’s Local Rules. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 24 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY RECOMMENDED that: 25 1. Plaintiff’s August 12, 2019 complaint (ECF No. 1) be dismissed without prejudice; and 26 2. This action be closed. 27 These findings and recommendations will be submitted to the United States District Judge 28 assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within thirty (30) days 1 after being served with these findings and recommendations, plaintiff may file written objections 2 with the court. A document containing objections should be titled “Objections to Magistrate 3 Judge’s Findings and Recommendations.” Plaintiff is advised that failure to file objections within 4 the specified time may, under certain circumstances, waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 5 order. See Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991). 6 DATED: March 27, 2020 /s/ DEBORAH BARNES UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 DLB:6 DB/orders/orders.pro se/iegorova1552.dlop.f&rs 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Document Info

Docket Number: 2:19-cv-01552

Filed Date: 3/30/2020

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 6/19/2024