Baalim v. Washington Passport Agency

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

MALAK BAALIM

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 24-1313 (TJK) WASHINGTON PASSPORT AGENCY et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM

On January 21, 2025, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss. The next day, the Court entered

a Fox Order ordering Plaintiff to respond by February 5, 2025, and if not, advising him that the

Court may treat Defendant’s motion as conceded and dismiss the case. Over six weeks after that

deadline, Plaintiff filed a motion for an extension. Although that motion did not specify the length

of the requested extension, the Court granted it and gave Plaintiff until May 6, 2025—three months

after the original deadline—to oppose Defendants’ motion to dismiss. Still, Plaintiff has not filed

any opposition to that motion, nor has he requested additional time to do so. Thus, pursuant to

Local Rule 83.23 and the Court’s “inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for a plaintiff’s

failure to prosecute or otherwise comply with a court order,” Peterson v. Archstone Communities

LLC, 637 F.3d 416, 418 (D.C. Cir. 2011), the Court will dismiss the case without prejudice. A

separate order will issue.

/s/ Timothy J. Kelly _____ TIMOTHY J. KELLY United States District Judge Date: May 12, 2025