Dunwoody v. Biden

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

KEITH B DUNWOODY,

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action No. 24-2945 (TJK)

JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., et al.,

Defendants.

MEMORANDUM

In October 2024, Defendants removed this case from D.C. Superior Court. On December

18, 2024, Defendants moved to dismiss. The next day, the Court entered a Fox Order ordering

Plaintiff to respond by January 17, 2025, and if not, advising him that the Court may treat Defend-

ants’ motion as conceded and dismiss the case. That deadline passed with no response from Plain-

tiff. A few days later, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause by February 5, 2025, why it should

not treat Defendants’ motion as conceded. See Min. Order of Jan. 23, 2025. Again, Plaintiff failed

to respond by the deadline. Now, two months after that, the docket still reflects no response from

Plaintiff to either order. Indeed, Plaintiff has filed nothing on the docket since the case was re-

moved. For these reasons, 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 dis-

miss the case without prejudice. A separate order will issue.

/s/ Timothy J. Kelly _____ TIMOTHY J. KELLY United States District Judge Date: April 11, 2025