Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05784/USCOURTS-cand-4_09-cv-05784-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 530
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Habeas Corpus
Cause of Action: 28:2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)

---

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

1 Magistrate Judge Kellison indicated that he was unable to determine whether to construe

Petitioner's case as a civil rights action or a habeas corpus action, stating: 

It is unclear whether petitioner is actually challenging a prison discipline or is

complaining about the conditions of his confinement. If the latter, his remedy lies

in a civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See Rizzo v. Dawson, 778 F.2d

527, 531-32 (9th Cir. 1985). Either way, the proper court to raise these issues is the

Northern District. 

(Nov. 20, 2009 Order at 1 n.1.)

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MELVIN DUKES,

Petitioner,

 v.

E. R. JONES, 

Respondent. /

No. C 09-5784 SBA (PR)

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Petitioner, a state prisoner, filed this pro se action in the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of California. In an Order dated November 20, 2009, Magistrate Judge Craig M.

Kellison of the Eastern District ordered it transferred to this Court on venue grounds.1

On December 15, 2009, the instant case was received by this Court. On that same date, the

Clerk of the Court sent Petitioner a notice that this case had been transferred to this Court. 

In an Order dated December 17, 2009, the Court directed Petitioner to inform the Court of

his continued intent to prosecute this action. The Court informed Petitioner that if he failed to do so

within thirty days, this action would be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The

Order was sent to Petitioner at his last known address, Salinas Valley State Prison. 

On December 28, 2009, Petitioner filed a letter with the Court; however, he failed to inform

the Court of his continued intent to prosecute.

On February 11, 2010, the Clerk of the Court responded to Petitioner's December 28, 2009

letter and directed Petitioner to file a motion for an extension of time to respond to the Court's

December 17, 2009 Order because the deadline to do so had passed. The Clerk's letter was returned

on February 18, 2010, as undeliverable with a notation: "Return to Sender–Inmate Refused."

Case 4:09-cv-05784-SBA Document 10 Filed 02/26/10 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

 The court should also afford the litigant prior notice of its intention to dismiss, id. at 133,

as this Court has done.

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\CR.09\Dukes5784.41(b)-DISMISSAL.wpd 2

More than thirty days have passed since the Court issued its December 17, 2009 Order, and

Petitioner has failed to communicate with the Court since his December 28, 2009 letter. A district

court may sua sponte dismiss an action for failure to prosecute or to comply with a court order

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). See Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 633

(1962); McKeever v. Block, 932 F.2d 795, 797 (9th Cir. 1991). The court should consider five

factors before dismissing an action under Rule 41(b): (1) the public interest in the expeditious

resolution of the litigation: (2) the court's need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the

defendants; (4) the availability of less drastic sanctions; and (5) the public policy favoring the

disposition of actions on their merits. See Malone v. United States Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 130

(9th Cir. 1987).2

 The first three factors, above, weigh in favor of dismissal in light of the fact that

Petitioner has not pursued this matter by filing a notice of his continued intent to prosecute this

action, as directed by this Court. In addition, he has previously refused documents from the United

States District Court for the Eastern District of California and, more recently, he has refused the

Clerk's February 11, 2010 letter. The fourth factor also weighs in favor of dismissal because less

drastic sanctions would have little impact in light of Petitioner's apparent lack of interest in this case. 

Although the fifth factor appears to weigh against dismissal, dismissal is appropriate in light of the

other four factors. See Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 643 (9th Cir. 2002) (finding district

court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing petition with prejudice where three of the five factors

weighed in favor of dismissal). 

In light of the foregoing, this action is hereby DISMISSED for failure to prosecute, pursuant

to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

The Clerk of the Court shall close the file and terminate any pending motions. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: 2/25/10 

SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG

United States District Judge

Case 4:09-cv-05784-SBA Document 10 Filed 02/26/10 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

P:\PRO-SE\SBA\CR.09\Dukes5784.41(b)-DISMISSAL.wpd 3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

MELVIN DUKES,

Plaintiff,

 v.

E R JUNES et al,

Defendant. /

Case Number: CV09-05784 SBA 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned, hereby certify that I am an employee in the Office of the Clerk, U.S. District

Court, Northern District of California.

That on February 26, 2010, I SERVED a true and correct copy(ies) of the attached, by placing said

copy(ies) in a postage paid envelope addressed to the person(s) hereinafter listed, by depositing said

envelope in the U.S. Mail, or by placing said copy(ies) into an inter-office delivery receptacle

located in the Clerk's office.

Melvin Dukes D-33572

Salinas Valley State Prison (1050)

P.O. Box 1050

Soledad, CA 93960-1050

Dated: February 26, 2010

Richard W. Wieking, Clerk

By: LISA R CLARK, Deputy Clerk

Case 4:09-cv-05784-SBA Document 10 Filed 02/26/10 Page 3 of 3