1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 ABC Industrial Laundry, Case No. 2:21-cv-01029-CDS-VCF

5 Plaintiff Order Dismissing Action 6 v. and Closing Case

7 Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty, et al.,

8 Defendants

9 10 On March 16, 2023, I granted defendants Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty and 11 American Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss. ECF No. 44. I cautioned plaintiff ABC 12 Industrial Laundry that, if it chose to file an amended complaint, it must do so within 30 days of 13 that order, and failure to do so could result in the closing of this case. Id. at 10. Six months have 14 since passed; to date, ABC has not filed an amended complaint nor sought an extension of time 15 to file one. As a result, the court dismisses ABC’s action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 41(b). See Edwards v. Marin Park, Inc.,

(9th Cir. 2004) (“The failure of the 17 plaintiff eventually to respond to the court’s ultimatum—either by amending the complaint or 18 indicating to the court that [he] will not do so—is properly met with the sanction of a Rule 19 41(b) dismissal.”) 20 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) grants district courts the authority to sua sponte 21 dismiss actions for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with court orders. See Link v. Wabash R. 22 Co.,

, 629–31 (1962) (“expressly recogniz[ing]” the district court’s authority to 23 dismiss a plaintiff’s action with prejudice because of his failure to prosecute, finding that “[t]he 24 power to invoke this sanction is necessary in order to prevent undue delays in the disposition of 25 pending cases and to avoid congestion in the calendars of District Courts.”). Accordingly, this 26 action is dismissed in its entirety without further leave to amend based on plaintiff’s failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court is kindly instructed to enter judgment accordingly and to close 2|| this case. 3 DATED: November 2, 2023 /, / SLL. 5 ihe: —— 6 tages District Judge 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26