Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-00226/USCOURTS-cand-5_07-cv-00226-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 440
Nature of Suit: Other Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 28:1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights

---

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

Albert Rose Jones,

Plaintiff,

 v.

United States of America, et al.,

Defendants. /

NO. C 07-00226 JW 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

On January 11, 2007, Plaintiff filed her Complaint with an Application to Proceed in Forma

Pauperis. (See Docket Item Nos. 1, 2.) On February 13, 2007, the Court denied Plaintiff’s

Application. (See Docket Item No. 5.) Plaintiff sought reconsideration or an extension of time to

pay her filing fees. Plaintiff states that she would file addition papers by May 15, 2007. (See

Docket Item No. 6.) On April 30, 2007, the Court conducted the initial case management

conference as set forth by the Clerk’s Order upon the filing of the case. Plaintiff failed to appear. 

(See Docket Item No. 8.)

A district court has the authority to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution pursuant to its

inherent authority and Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Link v. Wabash R.

Co., 370 U.S. 626 ( 1962). Rule 41(b) states in pertinent part: "For failure of the plaintiff to

prosecute or to comply with these rules or any order of the court, a defendant may move for

dismissal of an action or of any claim against the defendant. . . . [A] dismissal under this subdivision

. . . operates as an adjudication upon the merits." Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). "This power is necessary to

Case 5:07-cv-00226-JW Document 10 Filed 07/06/07 Page 1 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

prevent undue delay in the disposition of pending cases, docket congestion, and, the possibility of

harassment of a defendant." Medeiros v. U.S., 621 F.2d 468, 470 (1st Cir. 1980). 

To date, Plaintiff has not made any further filing in this case. Plaintiff’s failure to appear for

the case management conference is further evidence that Plaintiff has abandoned this litigation. 

Accordingly, the Court DISMISSES this action pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure which is a dismissal on the merits. Judgment will be entered in favor of all Defendants.

Dated: July 6, 2007 

JAMES WARE

United States District Judge

Case 5:07-cv-00226-JW Document 10 Filed 07/06/07 Page 2 of 3
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT COPIES OF THIS ORDER HAVE BEEN DELIVERED TO:

Alberta Rose Jones

1144 Tangerine Way

Sunnyvale, CA 94087

Rosario Marinello

266 Reservation Rd., #F-232

Marina, Ca 93933 

Dated: July 6, 2007 Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: /s/ JW Chambers 

Elizabeth Garcia

Courtroom Deputy

Case 5:07-cv-00226-JW Document 10 Filed 07/06/07 Page 3 of 3