Hogue v. Pacific Composites, Inc.
Hogue v. Pacific Composites, Inc.
Trial Court Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 THE DISTRICT COURT OF GUAM 8 JARRET HOGUE and GELYNE GAMBITO, CIVIL CASE NO. 16-00041 9 Plaintiffs, 10 vs. ORDER 11 PACIFIC COMPOSITES, Inc., dbaShipright! 12 andboatSHOP, AMANDA YOUNG, CHRISTOPHEAR YOUNG, MOYLAN’S 13 INSURANCE UNDERWRITERS, INC., 14 Defendants. 15 16 On March 29, 2022, the court issued an Order to Show Cause against Plaintiffs and 17 directed them to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See 18 Order, ECF No. 160. The court received an email communication from Mr. Jarret Hogue stating 19 that they “do not have the time, nor resources, to represent [themselves] in this case.” See ECF 20 No. 161. The Order to Show Cause was served on Plaintiffs via mail at three different addresses: 21 one was the P.O. Box address provided by Mr. Hogue; the second one was at their counsel of 22 record, which was returned as undeliverable; and the third was at a residential address, which 23 was also returned as undeliverable. Page 2 of 2
1 The court has the inherent power to sua sponte dismiss a case for lack of prosecution. Ash 2 || v. Cvetkov,
739 F.2d 493(9th Cir. 1984). “[T]he district court must weigh the court’s need to 3 || manage its docket, the public interest in expeditious resolution of litigation, and the risk of 4 || prejudice to the defendants against the policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits, and 5 || the availability of less drastic sanctions.” /d. (citations omitted). 6 In order for the court to manage its docket and to reflect the public’s interest in the 7 || expeditious resolution of litigation, the court finds that dismissal of this case is warranted. The 8 || court finds that no less drastic sanction is available, as Mr. Hogue had expressly informed the 9 || court that they do not have the time nor the resources to represent themselves in this case. 10 || Further, despite having been served with the Order to Show Cause, they have not shown cause as 11 || to why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. For the reasons stated herein, 12 || the above-captioned matter is DISMISSED. 13 SO ORDERED. 14 15 us /s/ Frances M. Tydingco-Gatewood aa. Chief Judge 16 me A Dated: October 6, 2022 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Reference
- Status
- Unknown