IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MONTANA HELENA DIVISION

SHANE LOUIS BURD, CV-21-0025-H-SEH Plaintiff, VS. ORDER SGT. WEBER, LT. POSTMA, SGT. AYERS, and CARRY WALSTED, Defendants.

Mail sent to Plaintiff Shane Louis Burd from this Court on January 13, 2022, has again been returned as undeliverable,' notwithstanding that the Court had previously advised him that he must, at all times, immediately advise the Court and opposing counsel of any change of address.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes the Court, on its own without awaiting a motion, to dismiss an action “[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute” the action. ?

“The public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation ... favors dismissal.’ Burd has failed to update his address or otherwise move this litigation

19. 2 Doc. 12; Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 3 Link v. Wabash Railroad Co.,

(1962); Hells Canyon Preservation Council v. United States Forest Serv.,

(9th Cir. 2005). 4 Yourish v. California Amplifier,

(9th Cir. 1999).

forward. “The trial judge is in the best position to determine whether the delay in a particular case interferes with docket management and the public interest.”> The Court cannot manage its docket if a party refuses to honor the Court’s orders. A rebuttable presumption of prejudice to respondents arises if a plaintiff unreasonably delays prosecution of an action.® All factors favor dismissal. Burd did not comply with the Court’s order.’ Less drastic alternatives have been considered. This case cannot move forward. Dismissal is warranted. ORDERED I Burd’s Complaint® is DISMISSED for failure to prosecute. 2. Filing of this action counts as one strike under

(e)(2)(B)(ii). 3. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case and enter judgment of dismissal. . 4 DATED this _// day of February, 2022. Gm /; am E. Haddon United States District Court Judge

> Pagtalunan v. Galaza,

(9th Cir. 2002). ° Inre Eisen,

(9th Cir. 1994). Doc. 18. . 8’ Doc. 2.