Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01521/USCOURTS-caed-1_14-cv-01521-6/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 550
Nature of Suit: Prisoner - Civil Rights (U.S. defendant)
Cause of Action: 42:1983 Prisoner Civil Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

THOMPSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

MYER-ZLOKOVICH, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 1:14-cv-01521-LJO-JLT (PC)

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO 

DISMISS CASE FOR FAILURE TO OBEY A 

COURT ORDER

(Doc. 20)

30-DAY DEADLINE 

On July 13, 2015, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 16.) On 

August 6, 2015, the Court issued the Second Information Order notifying Plaintiff of the 

requirements to oppose a motion for summary judgment and that an opposition must be filed 

within twenty-one days of the date Defendants' filed their motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 

18.) Plaintiff did not file an opposition or a statement of opposition within twenty-one days of the 

date Defendants' filed their motion. On August 21, 2015, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an 

opposition or a statement of non-opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment within 

twenty-one days of the date that order issued. (Doc. 20.) More than twenty-one days have passed 

and Plaintiff still has failed to file an opposition, or statement of non-opposition, or to respond in 

any way to Defendants' motion for summary judgment or to this Court’s orders. 

Local Rule 110 provides that "failure of counsel or of a party to comply with these Rules 

or with any order of the Court may be grounds for the imposition by the Court of any and all 

Case 1:14-cv-01521-LJO-JLT Document 21 Filed 09/29/15 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

sanctions . . . within the inherent power of the Court." District courts have the inherent power to 

control their dockets and "in the exercise of that power, they may impose sanctions including, 

where appropriate . . . dismissal of a case." Thompson v. Housing Auth., 782 F.2d 829, 831 (9th 

Cir. 1986). A court may dismiss an action, with prejudice, based on a party's failure to prosecute 

an action, failure to obey a court order, or failure to comply with local rules. See, e.g. Ghazali v. 

Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53-54 (9th Cir. 1995) (dismissal for noncompliance with 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, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988) 

(dismissal for failure to comply with local rule requiring pro se plaintiffs to 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, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986)

(dismissal for failure to lack of prosecution and failure to comply with local rules).

In determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution, failure to obey a court 

order, or failure to comply with local rules, the Court must consider several factors: (1) the 

public's interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the Court's need to manage its docket; 

(3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on 

their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives. 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, 

46 F.3d at 53.

In the instant case, the Court finds that the public's interest in expeditiously resolving this 

litigation and the Court's interest in managing the docket weigh in favor of dismissal. The third 

factor, risk of prejudice to defendants, also weighs in favor of dismissal, since a presumption of 

injury arises from the occurrence of unreasonable delay in prosecuting an action. Anderson v. Air 

West, 542 F.2d 522, 524 (9th Cir. 1976). The fourth factor -- public policy favoring disposition 

of cases on their merits -- is greatly outweighed by the factors in favor of dismissal discussed 

herein. Finally, a Court's warning to a party that his failure to obey the court's order will result in 

dismissal satisfies the "consideration of alternatives" requirement. Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d at 

1262; Malone, 833 at 132-33; Henderson, 779 F.2d at 1424. The Court's order requiring Plaintiff 

Case 1:14-cv-01521-LJO-JLT Document 21 Filed 09/29/15 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3

to file an opposition or statement of non-opposition to Defendants' motion for summary judgment 

expressly stated in bold that "Plaintiff is warned that the failure to comply with this order will 

result dismissal of this action, with prejudice, for failure to prosecute." Thus, Plaintiff had 

adequate warning that dismissal may result from his noncompliance with the Court's order.

Accordingly, the court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that this action be dismissed based on 

Plaintiff's failure to obey the Court's order of August 21, 2015 (Doc. 20). 

These Findings and Recommendations will be submitted to the United States District 

Judge assigned to the case, pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l). Within 30

days after being served with these Findings and Recommendations, the parties may file written 

objections with the Court. The document should be captioned “Objections to Magistrate Judge’s 

Findings and Recommendations.” The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the 

specified time may result in the waiver of rights on appeal. Wilkerson v. Wheeler, 772 F.3d 834, 

839 (9th Cir. 2014) (citing Baxter v. Sullivan, 923 F.2d 1391, 1394 (9th Cir. 1991)).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 28, 2015 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:14-cv-01521-LJO-JLT Document 21 Filed 09/29/15 Page 3 of 3