Cedar Lane Technologies Inc v. Latecoere International Inc

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE CEDAR LANE TECHNOLOGIES INC., CASE NO. 2:22-CV-01825-LK Plaintiff, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE 12 v. 13 LATECOERE INTERNATIONAL INC., 14 Defendant.

16 This matter comes before the Court sua sponte. Other than the Court’s posting of its Updated Standing Order for All Civil Cases, Dkt. No. 7, there has been no activity of record in this case since Plaintiff filed its corporate disclosure statement on January 1, 2023. Dkt. No. 6.

19 Plaintiffs have a general duty to prosecute their claims, see Fid. Phila. Tr. Co. v. Pioche Mines Consol., Inc., 587 F.2d 27, 29 (9th Cir. 1978), and they fail to fulfill this duty when they do not litigate their case, see, e.g., Spesock v. U.S. Bank, NA, No. C18-0092-JLR, 2018 WL 5825439, at *3 (W.D. Wash. Nov. 7, 2018). “[T]o prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases and to avoid congestion in the calendars of the District Courts,” federal courts may exercise their inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to prosecute. Link v. Wabash R. Co., 370 2 U.S. 626, 629–31 (1962).

3 The Court therefore ORDERS Plaintiff to show cause why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute within 21 days of this Order. Failure to respond will result in dismissal without prejudice.

6 Dated this 24th day of July, 2023.

7 A 8 Lauren King United States District Judge