Abelardo Ramirez v. Farm Bureau Property & Casualty Insurance Company, et al.

1 WO 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

9 Abelardo Ramirez, No. CV-25-00736-PHX-KML 10 Plaintiff, ORDER v. Farm Bureau Property & Casualty Insurance Company, et al., Defendants.

15 The case management order required the parties file a notice of readiness for trial no later than December 8, 2025. (Doc. 10.) The parties did not file that notice and on December 10, 2025, the court ordered the parties to file their notice no later than December 17, 2025. (Doc. 15.) Again the parties did not file a notice or any other document. The record shows neither party is willing to comply with court orders or otherwise prosecute this case.

21 “In determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution,” the court must consider “(1) the public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits and (5) the availability of less drastic sanctions.” Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988) (simplified). Here, the first and second factors support dismissal. The court has no information on the third factor regarding possible prejudice to the defendant because defendant has also refused to comply with court orders. On the fourth factor, it would be preferable to resolve this case on its || merits, but the parties’ refusal to respond to court orders makes that impossible. On the 2|| fifth factor, the only “less drastic sanction[]” available is dismissal without prejudice. || Given the limited information available and considering the various factors, dismissal without prejudice is appropriate.

5 IT IS ORDERED this case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Clerk || of Court shall enter judgment and close this case.

7 Dated this 23rd day of December, 2025.

10 AA AOR PW OC Honorable Krissa M. Lanham 1] United States District Judge _2-