1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 SAN JOSE DIVISION 7 8 LINDIE MALLORY, Case No. 23-cv-01230-BLF

9 Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING CASE FOR 10 v. FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

11 LOWES HOME CENTERS, LLC, 12 Defendant.

13

14 15 This case was administratively closed on October 16, 2023, pursuant to the parties’ notice 16 of settlement and request to vacate all dates. See Order Vacating All Dates, ECF 21. The Court 17 directed the parties to file a stipulated dismissal or a status report re settlement by December 15, 18 2023. See id. At the parties’ request, the Court twice extended the deadline for dismissal, first to 19 February 16, 2024 and then to April 19, 2024. See Orders on Joint Status, ECF 23; Order on Joint 20 Status, ECF 25. The parties did not file the expected dismissal within the time provided, and the 21 Court issued an Order to Show Cause why the case should not be dismissed for failure to 22 prosecute. See Order to Show Cause, ECF 26. The parties’ response to the Order to Show Cause 23 was due on June 21, 2024, and none has been filed. 24 Given these circumstances, the Court must determine whether dismissal of the case is 25 appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), authorizing dismissal for failure to 26 prosecute or failure to comply with court orders. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). Dismissal under Rule 27 41(b) “operates as an adjudication on the merits” unless the Court expressly orders otherwise. See 1 “Tn determining whether to dismiss a claim for failure to prosecute or failure to comply 2 || with a court order, the Court must weigh the following factors: (1) the public’s interest in 3 expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of 4 || prejudice to defendants/respondents; (4) the availability of less drastic alternatives; and (5) the 5 public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits. Pagtalunan v. Galaza,

, 6 642 (9th Cir. 2002). The first four factors factor strongly favor dismissal. This case has 7 needlessly dragged on for months after the parties advised that they had reached settlement (first 8 factor); the Court cannot manage its docket where parties fail to comply with its orders (second 9 factor); the Court perceives no prejudice to Defendant if the case is dismissed (third factor); and 10 || the Court cannot fashion a less drastic alternative given the parties’ failure to respond to the Order 11 to Show Cause (fourth factor). The Court finds that these factors outweigh the public policy 12 || favoring disposition of cases on their merits (fifth factor). 13 Accordingly, this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute and 14 || failure to comply with a court order. The Clerk shall close the file. 3 15 IT IS SO ORDERED. 16

= 17 Dated: July 18, 2024 18 Adiwlhccnan BETH LABSON FREEMAN 19 United States District Judge 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28