Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00544/USCOURTS-caed-1_06-cv-00544-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
James Boylan
Petitioner
Superior Court of Los Angeles
Respondent

Document Text:

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JAMES BOYLAN, 1:06-cv-00544-AWI-TAG-HC

Petitioner,

vs. REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES, 

Respondent.

 /

Petitioner is a state prisoner proceeding pro se with a petition for a writ of habeas corpus

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254.

On June 7, 2006, the Court issued an order requiring Petitioner to submit an application to

proceed in forma pauperis or pay the $5.00 filing fee for this action, within thirty days from the date

of service of that order. (Doc. 4). The thirty-day period has passed, yet Petitioner has not complied

with or otherwise respond to the Court’s order.

In determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution, 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 Respondents; (4) the public policy favoring

disposition of cases on their merits; and, (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives. Henderson v.

Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1423 (9th Cir. 1986); Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439 (9 Cir. 1988). th

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, as this case has been pending

Case 1:06-cv-00544-AWI-TAG Document 5 Filed 07/18/06 Page 1 of 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 2

since May 5, 2006. The third factor, risk of prejudice to Respondents, 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 (9 Cir. 1976). The fourth factor -- th

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 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 of June 7, 2006, expressly stated: “Failure to comply with this order will result in a

recommendation that this action be dismissed.” Thus, Petitioner had adequate warning that

dismissal would result from his noncompliance with the Court’s order.

 RECOMMENDATION

Accordingly, the Court HEREBY RECOMMENDS that this action be DISMISSED for

Petitioner's failure to prosecute. This Report and Recommendation is submitted to the United States

District Court Judge assigned to the case pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(B) and

Rule 72-304 of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court, Eastern District of

California. Within thirty (30) days after being served with a copy, any party may file written

objections with the Court and serve a copy on all parties. Such a document should be captioned

“Objections to Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation.” Replies to the objections shall be

served and filed within ten (10) court days (plus three days if served by mail) after service of the

objections. The Court will then review the Magistrate Judge’s ruling pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1)(C). The parties are advised that failure to file objections within the specified time may waive

the right to appeal the District Court’s order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 18, 2006 /s/ Theresa A. Goldner 

j6eb3d UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Case 1:06-cv-00544-AWI-TAG Document 5 Filed 07/18/06 Page 2 of 2