Dawson v. Bawden

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 10 ROBERT DAWSON, CASE NO. C21-1509JLR 11 Plaintiff, ORDER v. JOHN BAWDEN, et al., Defendants.

15 On March 4, 2022, the court ordered Plaintiff Robert Dawson to show cause within ten (10) days of that order why this action should not be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) based on his failure to serve Defendants John Bawden and Oracle Life Solutions, LLC (“Oracle”). (OSC (Dkt. # 7) (citing Fed. R. Civ. 19 P. 4(m)).) Mr. Dawson responded by filing an affidavit of service on March 8, 2022, representing that he timely served Mr. Bawden with a copy of the summons and complaint on November 13, 2021. (AOS (Dkt. # 8).) With respect to Oracle, Mr. Dawson has provided neither proof of service nor a response to the court’s show cause order. (See generally Dkt.) Accordingly, the court DISMISSES Oracle from this matter without prejudice.

3 Additionally, since serving Mr. Bawden on November 13, 2021, Mr. Dawson has taken no further action to prosecute this matter against Mr. Bawden, despite the fact that Mr. Bawden has defaulted on his obligation to answer to Mr. Dawson’s complaint.

6 See Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(1)(A)(i) (requiring defendants to answer the complaint within “21 days after being served with the summons and complaint”); (see generally Dkt.).

8 The court reminds Mr. Dawson of his obligation to diligently prosecute his case and that the court is empowered to take action, including dismissal of this matter, “to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases and to avoid congestion” on its docket.

11 See Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 U.S. 626, 629-30 (1962); Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b); Local Rules W.D. Wash LCR 41(b).

13 Dated this 18th day of March, 2022.

14 A JAMES L. ROBART 16 United States District Judge