M.G. v. Seattle School District

W.D. Washington

M.G. v. Seattle School District

DecidedAugust 28, 2024

Docket2:24-cv-00663

StatusUnknown

This text of M.G. v. Seattle School District (M.G. v. Seattle School District) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

M.G. v. Seattle School District, (W.D. Wash. 2024).

Pincite

Opinion

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 5 AT SEATTLE 6 M.G. a minor, by and through her parents 7 J.G. and other, C.G., CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00663-BAT Plaintiff, 8 ORDER DISMISSING CASE v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE 9 SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT, 10 Defendant. 11

This matter comes before the Court on its own motion. On July 3, 2024, the Court 12 granted Defendant’s motion to modify the briefing schedule. Dkt. 11. Plaintiff did not respond to 13 the motion. The Court found good cause to grant the motion as Plaintiff’s complaint neither 14 identifies the specific issues to be reviewed nor the grounds upon which Plaintiff contends the 15 ALJ erred. Id. In modifying the briefing schedule, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an opening 16 brief or motion by August 19, 2024. Id. 17 Plaintiff failed to file an opening brief or request a continuance. Therefore, on August 22, 18 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure 19 to comply with the Court’s July 3, 2024 Order. The Order to Show Cause stated “Cause will be 20 shown if Plaintiffs file their opening brief by Monday, August 26, 2024. Dkt. 12. As of the date 21 of this Order, Plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s Order to Show Cause. 22 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT 23 PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (allowing for involuntary 1 dismissal for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with the federal rules or court orders); 2 Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (courts may 3 dismiss cases sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute); Oliva v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 4 272, 274 (9th Cir. 1992) (“The district judge has an obligation to warn the plaintiff that dismissal

5 is imminent.”); Villalobos v. Vilsack, 601 F. App’x 551, 552 (9th Cir. 2015) (upholding district 6 court’s dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute after the plaintiff failed to respond to 7 the court’s order to show cause). 8 DATED this 28th day of August, 2024. 9 A 10 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA United States Magistrate Judge 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 5 AT SEATTLE 6 M.G. a minor, by and through her parents 7 J.G. and other, C.G., CASE NO. 2:24-cv-00663-BAT Plaintiff, 8 ORDER DISMISSING CASE v. WITHOUT PREJUDICE 9 SEATTLE SCHOOL DISTRICT, 10 Defendant. 11

This matter comes before the Court on its own motion. On July 3, 2024, the Court 12 granted Defendant’s motion to modify the briefing schedule. Dkt. 11. Plaintiff did not respond to 13 the motion. The Court found good cause to grant the motion as Plaintiff’s complaint neither 14 identifies the specific issues to be reviewed nor the grounds upon which Plaintiff contends the 15 ALJ erred. Id. In modifying the briefing schedule, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an opening 16 brief or motion by August 19, 2024. Id. 17 Plaintiff failed to file an opening brief or request a continuance. Therefore, on August 22, 18 2024, the Court ordered Plaintiff to show cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure 19 to comply with the Court’s July 3, 2024 Order. The Order to Show Cause stated “Cause will be 20 shown if Plaintiffs file their opening brief by Monday, August 26, 2024. Dkt. 12. As of the date 21 of this Order, Plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s Order to Show Cause. 22 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS that this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT 23 PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (allowing for involuntary 1 dismissal for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with the federal rules or court orders); 2 Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (courts may 3 dismiss cases sua sponte under Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute); Oliva v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 4 272, 274 (9th Cir. 1992) (“The district judge has an obligation to warn the plaintiff that dismissal

5 is imminent.”); Villalobos v. Vilsack, 601 F. App’x 551, 552 (9th Cir. 2015) (upholding district 6 court’s dismissal without prejudice for failure to prosecute after the plaintiff failed to respond to 7 the court’s order to show cause). 8 DATED this 28th day of August, 2024. 9 A 10 BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA United States Magistrate Judge 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

M.G. v. Seattle School District, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mg-v-seattle-school-district-wawd-2024.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack