1 2 3 4 5 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 8 9 ULTRAMAX PRODUCTS LTD., A United ) Case No.: 2:18-CV-01862-RCJ-DJA 10 Kingdom Limited Company, ) ) ) 11 Plaintiff, ) ) ORDER OF DISMISSAL 12 vs. ) ) 13 ) ANTHONY MICHAEL MITCHELL, An ) 14 Individual Residing in Nevada, ) ) 15 Defendant. ) ) 16

17 18 The Court filed the Notice Regarding Intent to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution Pursuant 19 to Local Rule 41-1 (ECF No. 33) on February 8, 2021. Plaintiff has not responded to the Court’s 20 order within the allotted time. 21 In determining whether to dismiss an action for lack of prosecution, failure to obey a 22 court order, or failure to comply with local rules, the court must consider several factors: (1) the 23 24 public’s interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the court’s need to manage its docket; 25 (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on 26 their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives. See Thompson, 782 F.2d at 831; 27 28 1 || Henderson, 779 F.2d at 1423-24; Malone, 833 F.2d at 130; Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1260-61; Ghazali, 46 F.3d at 53. All five factors point in favor of dismissal. The Court’s Order (ECF No. 33) requiring the Plaintiff to take action on or before March

5 || 8) 2021, expressly stated: “All civil actions that have been pending in this court for more than 6 || 270 days without any proceeding of record having been taken may, after notice, be dismissed for 7 |) want to prosecution by the court sua sponte or on the motion of an attorney or pro se party. Be ° advised the official record in this action reflects that this case has been pending for more than 270 days without any proceeding having been taken during such period. If no action is taken in

11 || this case by March 8, 2021, the Court shall enter an order of dismissal for want of prosecution.” 12 Plaintiff has failed to show good cause why this action should not be dismissed for wan prosecution pursuant to Local Rule 41-1. IT THEREFORE ORDERED that this action is DISMISSED for Plaintiffs failure t 5 16 comply with the Notice Regarding Intent to Dismiss for Want of Prosecution Pursuant to Loca 17 || Rule 41-1 (ECF No. 33). The Clerk of the Court shall close this case. +8 DATED: March 9, 2021. 20 ROBERT C. A@NES United States District Judge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28