Gober v. Rose ( 2021 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 * * * 9 ADAM GOBER, Case No. 3:20-cv-00593-GMN-WGC 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 SANDRA ROSE, 13 Defendant. 14 15 This action is a pro se civil rights action filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 by a 16 prisoner in the custody of the Nevada Department of Corrections. On June 11, 2021, the 17 Court issued an order dismissing his complaint with leave to amend his access to the 18 courts claim. (ECF No. 8 at 9). The time period for filing an amended complaint has now 19 expired, and Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint or otherwise responded to the 20 Court’s order. 21 District courts have the inherent power to control their dockets and “[i]n the 22 exercise of that power, they may impose sanctions including, where appropriate . . . 23 dismissal” of a case. Thompson v. Hous. Auth. of City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 24 (9th Cir. 1986). A court may dismiss an action, with prejudice, based on a party’s failure 25 to prosecute an action, failure to obey a court order, or failure to comply with local rules. 26 See Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53-54 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissal for noncompliance 27 with local rule); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992) (dismissal 28 for failure to comply with an order requiring amendment of complaint); Carey v. King, 856 1 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for failure to comply with local rule requiring 2 pro se plaintiffs to keep court apprised of address); Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 3 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987) (dismissal for failure to comply with court order); Henderson 4 v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for lack of prosecution and 5 failure to comply with local rules). 6 In determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution, failure to obey 7 a court order, or failure to comply with local rules, the court must consider several factors: 8 (1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to 9 manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring 10 disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives. 11 Thompson, 782 F.2d at 831; Henderson, 779 F.2d at 1423-24; Malone, 833 F.2d at 130; 12 Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1260-61; Ghazali, 46 F.3d at 53. 13 In the instant case, the Court finds that the first two factors, the public’s interest in 14 expeditiously resolving this litigation and the Court’s interest in managing the docket, 15 weigh in favor of dismissal. The third factor, risk of prejudice to Defendants, also weighs 16 in favor of dismissal, since a presumption of injury arises from the occurrence of 17 unreasonable delay in filing a pleading ordered by the court or prosecuting an action. See 18 Anderson v. Air West, 542 F.2d 522, 524 (9th Cir. 1976). The fourth factor – public policy 19 favoring disposition of cases on their merits – is greatly outweighed by the factors in favor 20 of dismissal discussed herein. Finally, a court’s warning to a party that his failure to obey 21 the court’s order will result in dismissal satisfies the “consideration of alternatives” 22 requirement. Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262; Malone, 833 F.2d at 132-33; Henderson, 779 23 F.2d at 1424. The Court’s order requiring Plaintiff to file an amended complaint within 24 thirty days expressly warned Plaintiff that this action would be dismissed with prejudice if 25 he failed to file a timely amended complaint. (ECF No. 8 at 9). Thus, Plaintiff had 26 adequate warning that dismissal would result from his noncompliance with the Court’s 27 order to file an amended complaint within thirty days. 28 For the foregoing reasons, it is ordered that this action is dismissed with prejudice 1 based on Plaintiff’s failure to file an amended complaint in compliance with this Court’s 2 June 11, 2021 order and for failure to state a claim. 3 It is further ordered that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and 4 close this case. 5 DATED THIS 2 day of A u g u s t 2021. 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28