Summary
The United States District Court for the Central District of California dismissed Epifanio Choc’s action without prejudice for failure to prosecute. The court held that Plaintiff’s failure to respond to an order to show cause and failure to identify any Doe defendants justified dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) and Central District of California Local Rule 41-1. The court evaluated the Ninth Circuit’s five-factor dismissal framework and concluded that the factors largely supported dismissal.
Holdings
- A district court may dismiss an action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), applicable local rules, and the court's inherent authority when a plaintiff fails to prosecute or comply with court orders, after considering the relevant Ninth Circuit factors.
- 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 to show cause.
- Whether dismissal should be with or without prejudice.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (10)
- 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)
- In re Eisen, 31 F.3d 1447, 1452-53 (9th Cir. 1994)(followed)
- Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1262 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…