Summary
The United States District Court for the Central District of California dismissed Star Fabrics, Inc.’s copyright infringement action without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b). The dismissal was based on the plaintiff’s failure to prosecute the case and comply with the court’s order to show cause.
Holdings
- A district court has authority under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) to dismiss an action when the plaintiff fails to prosecute or fails to comply with a court order.
- In deciding whether to dismiss, the court must consider the public's interest in expeditious resolution, the court's need to manage its docket, the risk of prejudice to defendants, the public policy favoring decisions on the merits, and the availability of less drastic sanctions.
- Dismissal was appropriate because Plaintiff failed to prosecute the action and failed to respond to the court's order to show cause, while the relevant dismissal factors favored termination.
Questions Presented
- Whether the action should be dismissed under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for Plaintiff's failure to prosecute.
- Whether the action should be dismissed for Plaintiff's failure to comply with the court's order to show cause.
- Whether the five factors governing dismissal for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders supported dismissal without prejudice.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (6)
- Link v. Wabash R.R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962)(followed)
- Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
- Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988) (per curiam)(followed)
- In re Eisen, 31 F.3d 1447, 1451-53 (9th Cir. 1994)(followed)
- Morris v. Morgan Stanley Co., 942 F.2d 648, 652 (9th Cir. 1991)(followed)
- W. Coast Theater Corp. v. City of Portland, 897 F.2d 1519, 1523 (9th Cir. 1990)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…