Parizek v. Ward County Jail

• Court: District Court, D. North Dakota
• Decided: June 12, 2020
• Docket: 1:18-cv-00110
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTH DAKOTA

Scott Roman Parizek, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE v. ) ) ) Case No. 1:18-cv-110 Ward County, ) ) Defendant. )

Plaintiff Scott Roman Parizek initiated this action on May 25, 2018. (Doc. No. 1). The Court issued a scheduling order on February 13, 2020. (Doc. No. 38). On June 4, 2020, counsel for Defendant contacted the Court to request a status conference regarding Parizek’s failures to prosecute his lawsuit. Counsel also advised the Court that their paralegal spoke with Parizek and obtained a new mailing address for him. The Court scheduled a status conference and instructed the Clerk’s office to send the notice of the status conference to Parizek’s new address. On June 12, 2020, the Court held a status conference, but Parizek did not attend. At the status conference, counsel for Defendant detailed Parizek’s failure to provide Rule 26(a) disclosures and provide discovery responses. Due to Parizek’s failure to attend the status conference and his failures to participate in the discovery process, the Court ORDERS that he submit a status report by June 26, 2020, advising the Court of the status of this action or otherwise showing cause why the matter should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. Failure to submit a status report to the court may result in dismissal of the action. See Miller v. Benson, 51 F.3d 166, 168 (8th Cir. 1995) (“District courts have inherent power to dismiss sua sponte a case for failure to prosecute, and we review the exercise of this power is reviewed for abuse of discretion.”) quoting Sterling v. United States, 985 F.2d 411, 412 (8th Cir. 1993) (same); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated this 12th day of June, 2020. /s/ Clare R. Hochhalter Clare R. Hochhalter United States Magistrate Judge