Hyatt v. Velocity Portfolio Group

Opinion

1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Jamel Hyatt, No. CV-23-08520-PCT-DWL

10 Plaintiff, ORDER

11 v.

12 Velocity Portfolio Group, et al.,

13 Defendants. 14 15 The only claim against Radius Global Solutions LLC has been dismissed. (Doc. 12.) 16 The remaining Defendant, Velocity Portfolio Group, was served with process pursuant to 17 Rule 4(m) on September 23, 2023 (Doc. 7) but never responded to the complaint or 18 otherwise appeared in this action. 19 On March 26, 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff to, by April 8, 2024, file either (1) 20 a notice of voluntary dismissal of this action or (2) a memorandum, not to exceed five 21 pages, showing cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute as to 22 Velocity Portfolio Group. (Doc. 14.) 23 Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s March 26, 2024 order. 24 “It is within the inherent power of the court to sua sponte dismiss a case for lack 25 of prosecution.” Ash v. Cvetkov, 739 F.2d 493, 496 (9th Cir. 1984). The Court considers 26 five factors when determining whether to dismiss a case for failure to prosecute or for 27 failure to comply with court orders, “including: (1) the public’s interest in expeditious 28 resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice 1 || to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and 2|| (5S) the availability of less drastic alternatives.” Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260- 61 (th Cir. 1992); Ash, 739 F.2d at 496. 4 The Court finds that no less drastic alternative to dismissal is appropriate here. The 5 || public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation and the Court’s need to manage its || docket outweigh the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits, under these 7\| circumstances. Plaintiff has not participated in this action since November 3, 2023. 8 || Plaintiff did not to respond to the Court’s order to show cause. Plaintiff has sought no || extension of time and appears to have abandoned this litigation entirely. As a result, this 10 || case has been pending for months with no progress made. 11 Nevertheless, dismissal without prejudice is a less drastic alternative to dismissal || with prejudice, and the Court therefore elects to dismiss this action without prejudice. 13 Accordingly, 14 IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff's claims against Velocity Portfolio Group are 15 || dismissed, without prejudice, as a sanction for Plaintiffs failure to comply with court || orders and failure to prosecute this action in good faith. The Clerk of Court shall enter || judgment accordingly and terminate this action. 18 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Radius Global Solutions LLC’s motion for 19 || entry of judgment as to one, but fewer than all, parties pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal || Rules of Civil Procedure (Doc. 13) is denied as moot, as judgment as to all parties will enter following this order. 22 Dated this 12th day of April, 2024. 23 24 Lm ee” 25 f _o———— Dominic W. Lanza 26 United States District Judge 27 28

_2-