Penland v. Mabus

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SYNEEDA L. PENLAND, :
:
Petitioner, : Civil Action No.: 09-1417 (RMU)
:
v. :
:
RAYMOND E. MABUS, :
Secretary of the Navy, :
:
Respondent. :
:
SYNEEDA L. PENLAND, :
:
Petitioner, : Civil Action No.: 09-1418 (RMU)
:
v. :
:
RAYMOND E. MABUS, :
Secretary of the Navy, :
:
Respondent. :
:
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DISMISSING THESE CASES WITHOUT PREJUDICE BASED ON
THE PETITIONER’S FAILURE TO PROSECUTE
The petitioner commenced these actions on July 29, 2009. On May 19, 2010, after
several months of inactivity in the case, the court issued an order directing the petitioner to show
cause on or before May 24, 2010 why these cases should not be dismissed for failure to
prosecute. Order (May 19, 2010). The petitioner has yet to file any response to the court’s
order.
“The authority of a federal trial court to dismiss a plaintiff’s action with prejudice
because of his failure to prosecute cannot seriously be doubted.” Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370
U.S. 626, 629 (1962); see also FED. R. CIV. P. 41(b) (authorizing the involuntary dismissal of
actions based on the plaintiff’s failure to prosecute); LCvR 83.23 (providing that the court may
dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute); Automated Datatron, Inc. v. Woodcock, 659
F.2d 1168, 1170 (D.C. Cir. 1981) (observing that “[i]f district court judges are to discharge their
heavy responsibilities effectively, their power to dismiss . . . must be more than theoretical”).
This Circuit has cautioned, however, that dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute is a
“harsh sanction” reserved for “cases involving egregious conduct by particularly dilatory
plaintiffs, after ‘less dire alternatives’ have been tried without success,” Noble v. U.S. Postal
Serv., 71 Fed. Appx. 69, 69 (D.C. Cir. 2003) (citing Trakas v. Quality Brands, Inc., 759 F.2d
185, 186-87 (D.C. Cir. 1985)).
In accordance with these principles, the court will not dismiss the case with prejudice, but
will instead impose the less dire sanction of dismissal without prejudice based on the petitioner’s
failure to prosecute these actions or respond to the court’s order to show cause. An Order
consistent with this Memorandum Opinion is separately and contemporaneously issued this 28th
day of June, 2010.
RICARDO M. URBINA
United States District Judge
2