1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 4 Lauren Colvin, et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-01395-CDS-DJA

5 Plaintiffs Notice Regarding Intent to Dismiss Under Local Rule 41-1 6 v.

7 Fenix International Limited, et al.,

8 Defendants

9 10 Plaintiffs Lauren Colvin, Youree Gemmill, and Pathamawan Hanford initiated this action 11 in the Eighth Judicial District Court in Clark County, Nevada in June of 2021. Compl., Defs.’ Ex. 12 A, ECF No. 2 at 8. Defendants Fenix International Limited dba OnlyFans removed it to federal 13 court in August 2022. Pet., ECF No. 1. Since that time there has been no substantive activity in 14 this matter. 15 This district’s Local Rules provide for dismissal of an action for want of prosecution: 16 All civil actions that have been pending in this Court for more than 270 days without any proceeding of record having been taken may, 17 after notice, be dismissed for want of prosecution by the court sua sponte or on the motion of an attorney or pro se party. 18 19 LR 41-1. Further, it is within the inherent power and discretion of the court to sua sponte 20 dismiss a civil case for lack of prosecution. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). A plaintiff must prosecute his 21 case with “reasonable diligence” to avoid dismissal under to Rule 41(b). Anderson v. Air W., 22 Inc.,

(9th Cir. 1976). 23 Here, it appears that plaintiffs have failed to prosecute with reasonable diligence because 24 this case has laid dormant since July of 2023. See ECF No. 37. Thus, this order serves as notice 25 26 that the complaint may be dismissed for failure to prosecute unless plaintiffs take action in this 2|| matter. Continued failure to properly prosecute will result in dismissal without prejudice, and 3} without further notice, on May 9, 2024. J, / 4 Dated: April 22, 2024 L LZ > Cris ie D. Silva 6 Units cl States District Judge 7 8 9 10 ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26