- 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Case No.: 2:18-cv-01994-JAD-NJK DOMONIC RONALDO MALONE, 5 Plaintiff 6 OrderDismissing Action v. 7 JAMES DZURENDA,et al., 8 Defendants 9 10 Plaintiff Domonic Ronaldo Malone brings this civil-rights case under § 1983 for events 11 he alleges occurred during his incarceration at High Desert State Prison.1 On October 28, 2019, 12 Iordered Malone to file a second-amended complaint by November 25, 2019.2 Iexpressly 13 warned him that his failure to timely comply with the order would result in the dismissal of this 14 case.3 The deadline has passed, and Malone has not filed a second-amended complaint. 15 District courts have the inherent power to control their dockets and “[i]n the exercise of 16 that power, they may impose sanctions including, where appropriate . . . dismissal” of a case.4 A 17 court may dismiss an action with prejudice based on a party’s failure to prosecute an action, 18 failure to obey a court order, or failure to comply with local rules.5 In determining whether to 19 1 ECF No. 3 (first amended complaint). 20 21 2 ECF No. 4(order). 22 3 Id. 23 4 Thompson v. Hous. Auth. of City of Los Angeles, 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th Cir. 1986). 24 5 See Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53–54 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissal for noncompliance with 25 local rule); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260–61 (9th Cir. 1992) (dismissal for failure to comply with an order requiring amendment of complaint); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440– 26 41 (9th Cir. 1988) (dismissal for failure to comply with local rule requiring pro se plaintiffs to 27 keep court apprised of address); Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987) (dismissal for failure to comply with court order); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 28 1424 (9th Cir. 1986) (dismissal for lack of prosecution and failure to comply with local rules). 1 1 dismiss an action for lack of prosecution, failure to obey a court order, or failure to comply with 2 local rules, the court must consider several factors: (1) the public’s interest in expeditious 3 resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the 4 defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the 5 availability of less drastic alternatives.6 6 I find that the first two factors—the public’s interest in expeditiously resolving the 7 litigation and the court’s interest in managing the docket—weigh in favor of dismissing this case. 8 The risk-of-prejudice factor also weighs in favor of dismissal because a presumption of injury 9 arises from the occurrence of unreasonable delay in filing a pleading ordered by the court or 10 prosecuting an action.7 The fourth factor is greatly outweighed by thefactors in favor of 11 dismissal, and a court’s warning to a party that his failure to obey the court’s order will result in 12 dismissal satisfies the consideration-of-alternatives requirement.8 Malone was warned that his 13 case would be dismissed with prejudice if he failed to file a second-amended complaint by 14 November 25, 2019.9 So, Malone had adequate warning that his failure to file a second-amended 15 complaint by the deadline would result in this case’s dismissal. 16 Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this action is DISMISSEDwith prejudice 17 based on Malone’s failure to file a second-amended complaint in compliance with this court’s 18 October 28, 2019, order; 19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Malone’s application for leave to proceed in forma 20 pauperis [ECF No. 1] is DENIEDas moot; and 21 22 23 24 6 Thompson, 782 F.2d at 831; Henderson, 779 F.2d at 1423–24; Malone, 833 F.2d at 130; Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1260–61; Ghazali, 46F.3d at 53. 25 7 See Anderson v. Air West, 542 F.2d 522, 524 (9th Cir. 1976). 26 27 8 Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262; Malone, 833 F.2d at 132–33; Henderson, 779 F.2d at 1424. 28 9 ECF No. 4(order). 2 1 The Clerk of Court is directed to ENTER JUDGMENT accordingly and CLOSE THIS 2 || CASE. Wee 3 U.S. District CEDES axa 4 Dated: December 12, 2019 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Document Info
Docket Number: 2:18-cv-01994
Filed Date: 12/12/2019
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 6/25/2024