2 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 6 kk 7 LERNER & ROWE INJURY ATTORNEYS, Case No. 2:19-CV-1837 JCM (EJY) 8 Plaintiff(s), ORDER 9 V. JOSE NICASIO TORRES, et al., 11 Defendant(s). 12 13 Presently before the court is the matter of Lerner & Rowe Injury Attorneys v. Torres et al. case number 2:19-cv-01837-JCM-EJY. 15 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) provides that “[i]f the plaintiff fails to prosecute 16) orto comply with these rules or a court order, a defendant may move to dismiss the action or 17 any claim against it.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). This court also has the inherent power to sua 18 sponte dismiss a case for want of prosecution or compliance with court orders. Link v. Wabash R Co.,

(1962); Pagtalunan v. Galaza,

(9th Cir. 2002); Ferdik v. Bonzelet,

(9th Cir. 1992). 21 This inherent power is codified in the district’s local rules. Local Rule 41-1 provides that “(alll civil actions that have been pending in this court for more than 270 days without any 23 proceeding of record having been taken may, after notice, be dismissed for want of prosecution 24 by the court sua sponte or on the motion of an attorney or pro se party.” LR 41-1. 25 On March 3, 2021, the court notified the parties that “[i]f no action is taken in this case within 30 days, the Court will enter an order of dismissal for want of prosecution.” (ECF No. 27\ 55). The parties have not taken any action since. 28

C. Mahan Judge

1 Accordingly, 2 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED that this matter be, and the 3| same hereby is, DISMISSED for want of prosecution. 4 The clerk shall close the case. 5 DATED April 7, 2021. 6 tias ©. Malan UNITED)STATES DISTRICT JUDGES 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

es C. Mahan District Judge _2-