Summary
The United States District Court for the Central District of California dismissed Santos Ovalle’s 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The court concluded that Plaintiff failed to comply with an order granting leave to amend after the complaint was screened and found deficient. The dismissal was entered under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and Central District of California Local Rule 41-1.
Holdings
- A district court may dismiss an action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and applicable local rules when a plaintiff fails to prosecute the action or comply with a court order. Applying the Ninth Circuit's five-factor test, dismissal was warranted because Plaintiff failed to respond after receiving a warning and the action had come to a complete halt.
- The dismissal should be without prejudice.
Questions Presented
- Whether the action should be dismissed for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with the court's order requiring a response.
- Whether dismissal should be with or without prejudice.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (10)
- Lopez v. Smith, 203 F.3d 1122, 1129 (9th Cir. 2000) (en banc)(followed)
- Monell v. Department of Social Services, 436 U.S. 658 (1978)(followed)
- Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962)(followed)
- Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53 (9th Cir. 1995) (per curiam)(followed)
- Al-Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381, 1385 (9th Cir. 1996)(followed)
- In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Prods. Liab. Litig., 460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
- Valley Eng'rs v. Elec. Eng'g Co., 158 F.3d 1051, 1057 (9th Cir. 1998)(followed)
- Yourish v. Cal. Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 1999)(followed)
- Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d 639, 642-43 (9th Cir. 2002)(followed)
- Hunter v. Sandoval, No. 17-cv-09257-CJC-SHK, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210543, at *5, 2018 WL 6570870, at *2 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 12, 2018)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…