Benjamin Karl Ray Bunton v. Keith Smith, et al.

Bunton · United States District Court for the Eastern District of California · November 4, 2025 · No. 1:23-cv-00211-JLT-SAB

Summary

The document contains findings and recommendations by a United States magistrate judge recommending dismissal with prejudice of Benjamin Karl Ray Bunton’s civil rights action for failure to prosecute and failure to comply with court orders. The court also vacated the scheduled November 12, 2025 hearing and advised that objections were due within fourteen days.

Holdings

  1. Dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) was warranted because Plaintiff failed to prosecute the action, failed to comply with multiple court orders, failed to participate in discovery, and failed to respond to the motion to dismiss and final order to show cause.
  2. The warning that failure to comply with the final order to show cause would result in a recommendation of dismissal with prejudice satisfied the requirement that the court consider less drastic sanctions.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the action should be dismissed with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute.
  2. Whether Plaintiff's repeated failure to comply with court orders justified dismissal after consideration of the Ninth Circuit's five dismissal factors.
  3. Whether the court had adequately considered lesser sanctions before recommending dismissal.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (14)

  • Bautista v. Los Angeles Cty., 216 F.3d 837, 841 (9th Cir. 2000)(followed)
  • Ready Transp., Inc. v. AAR Mfg., Inc., 627 F.3d 402, 404 (9th Cir. 2010)(followed)
  • Ghazali v. Moran, 46 F.3d 52, 53-54 (9th Cir. 1995)(followed)
  • Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992)(followed)
  • Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440-41 (9th Cir. 1988)(followed)
  • Malone v. United States Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 130-33 (9th Cir. 1987)(followed)
  • Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1423-24 (9th Cir. 1986)(followed)
  • In re Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) Prods. Liab. Litig., 460 F.3d 1217, 1226 (9th Cir. 2006)(followed)
  • Yourish v. California Amplifier, 191 F.3d 983, 990 (9th Cir. 1999)(followed)
  • Hernandez v. City of El Monte, 138 F.3d 393, 399 (9th Cir. 1998)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 14.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…