Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-1_18-cv-04889/USCOURTS-cand-1_18-cv-04889-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 864
Nature of Suit: Social Security - SSID Title XVI
Cause of Action: 42:405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)

---

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EUREKA DIVISION

FRANK LEROY BOWIE,

Plaintiff,

v.

ANDREW M. SAUL,

Defendant.

Case No. 18-cv-04889-RMI 

ORDER DISMISSING CASE 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

This Social Security appeal was filed on August 12, 2018. (Dkt. 1). Pursuant to the Court’s 

Scheduling Order, Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment was due on January 17, 2019. (Dkt.

7). Nearly ten months have passed, and Plaintiff’s motion has not been filed. In fact, Plaintiff’s

first and last contact with the court was on August 12, 2018. (Dkts. 1, 3, 4). 

On October 7, 2019, the court entered an Order to Show Cause regarding Dismissal. (Dkt. 

18). The court therefore ordered Plaintiff to show cause, no later than November 7, 2019, why this 

appeal should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Id. The deadline for 

Plaintiff to respond to the court’s Order to Show Cause passed without a response from Plaintiff. 

“In determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution, the district court is 

required to weigh 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 

sanctions.’” Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988) (quoting Henderson v. Duncan,

779 F.2d 1421, 1423 (9th Cir.1986)).

In this instance, Plaintiff’s abandonment of his case controls the five factors set forth in 

Case 1:18-cv-04889-RMI Document 19 Filed 11/08/19 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Carey. Although public policy favors disposition of cases on their merits, Plaintiff’s utter failure 

to litigate this case makes it impossible for the court to proceed. The court’s need to manage its 

docket, the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation, and the risk of prejudice to 

Defendant all weigh in favor of dismissal. The court has waited approximately ten months for 

Plaintiff to file his motion for summary judgment, yet he has not done so and has not 

communicated with the court. There are no less drastic alternatives available.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this case is dismissed without prejudice for 

failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 8, 2019

ROBERT M. ILLMAN

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:18-cv-04889-RMI Document 19 Filed 11/08/19 Page 2 of 2