CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA JS-6

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. CV 19-5020 MWF (RAOx) Date: December 14, 2021 Title: Balbina Padilla v. Alta Dena Certified Dairy, LLC, et al. Present: The Honorable MICHAEL W. FITZGERALD, U.S. District Judge

Deputy Clerk: Court Reporter: Rita Sanchez Not Reported

Attorneys Present for Plaintiff: Attorneys Present for Defendant: None Present None Present

Proceedings (In Chambers): ORDER DISMISSING ACTION WITHOUT

PREJUDICE

On November 16, 2021, the Court filed an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”). (Docket No. 41). The OSC required the parties to file a Joint Status Report, no later than December 3, 2021, regarding the Suggestion of Bankruptcy and the status of this action since dismissal of the appeal. The OSC further required that if Defendants refused to cooperate, Plaintiff was to file a unilateral report by December 3, 2021. The OSC warned that if no status report was filed by the deadline, the action would be dismissed for failure to prosecute. As of December 13, 2021, no joint or unilateral status report has been filed. It is well-established that a district court has authority to dismiss a plaintiff’s action due to failure to prosecute and/or to comply with court orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Link v. Wabash Railroad Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629–30 (1962) (noting that district court’s authority to dismiss for lack of prosecution is necessary to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases and avoid congestion in district court calendars); Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260 (9th Cir. 1992) (stating that district court may dismiss action for failure to comply with any order of the court). Before ordering dismissal, the Court must consider five 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 Defendant; (4) the public policy favoring the disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions. ______________________________________________________________________________

CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CIVIL MINUTES—GENERAL

Case No. CV 19-5020 MWF (RAOx) Date: December 14, 2021 Title: Balbina Padilla v. Alta Dena Certified Dairy, LLC, et al. See In re Eisen, 31 F.3d 1447, 1451 (9th Cir. 1994) (failure to prosecute); Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1260–61 (failure to comply with court orders). Taking all of these factors into account, dismissal for lack of prosecution is warranted. Plaintiff was specifically warned that failure to respond to the OSC would result in dismissal of this action. Accordingly, the action is DISMISSED without prejudice. This Order shall constitute notice of entry of judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Pursuant to Local Rule 58-6, the Court ORDERS the Clerk to treat this Order, and its entry on the docket, as an entry of judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________________________________________________________