Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02762/USCOURTS-cand-5_14-cv-02762-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 442
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

---

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

OLEN A. HENRY,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAN JOSE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, LP 

d/b/a REGIOINAL MEDICAL CENTER OF 

SAN JOSE,

Defendant.

Case No. 5:14-cv-02762 HRL

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

This case has been pending for nearly a year, with little apparent progress. In the nearly 

four months since plaintiff’s counsel was permitted to withdraw, plaintiff has not appeared in pro

se or through a new attorney. Defendant’s written discovery requests (served nearly 8 months 

ago) remain unanswered, and plaintiff’s deposition has had to be canceled twice. Defendant says 

that it has been having difficulty in moving the case forward because its numerous attempts to 

proceed with discovery and mediation have largely been ignored. The situation has already 

required the court to continue its previously set case management deadlines. Yet, this court is told 

that matters remain at a standstill.

On April 17, 2015, this court issued an order directing plaintiff to appear on May 5, 2015 

and show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Dkt. 32). In that 

order, plaintiff was warned that, if he failed to appear or if there was no appearance by an attorney 

Case 5:14-cv-02762-HRL Document 36 Filed 05/05/15 Page 1 of 3
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

who has entered a formal appearance on his behalf, this matter would be dismissed without further 

briefing or hearing.1 (Id.).

Defendant appeared for the show cause hearing. Plaintiff did not. Nor did any attorney 

make an appearance on his behalf.

Accordingly, this matter is dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. 

Defendant’s second motion for a further extension of case management deadlines is denied as

moot. The clerk shall close the file.

Plaintiff’s former attorneys at Burton Employment Law, who remain on this docket solely 

for forwarding purposes, shall file a proof of service of this order as to plaintiff.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 5, 2015

______________________________________

HOWARD R. LLOYD

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

 1 Plaintiff’s former counsel was permitted to withdraw subject to the condition that papers could 

continue to be served on them for forwarding purposes. They filed a proof of service showing that 

the order to show cause was mailed to plaintiff on April 21, 2015. (Dkt. 33).

Case 5:14-cv-02762-HRL Document 36 Filed 05/05/15 Page 2 of 3
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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

5:14-cv-02762-HRL Notice has been electronically mailed to:

Allison Vasquez Saunders asaunders@fordharrison.com, mgarner@fordharrison.com

Angela S. Fontana afontana@fordharrison.com, asaunders@fordharrison.com, 

mgarner@fordharrison.com

Jocelyn Burton jburton@burtonemploymentlaw.com, jmoon@burtonemploymentlaw.com

Joel Moon joelmoon3@gmail.com, jmoon@burtonemploymentlaw.com

Case 5:14-cv-02762-HRL Document 36 Filed 05/05/15 Page 3 of 3