Ogilvie v. Sanofi US Services Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 10 SHAREN OGILVIE, CASE NO. C23-1010JLR 11 Plaintiff, ORDER v. SANOFI-AVENTIS US LLC, et al., Defendants.

15 On May 30, 2023, this matter was transferred to the Western District of Washington from the Eastern District of Louisiana. (5/30/23 Transf. Order (Dkt. # 7).)

17 The Clerk issued a case opening letter instructing that counsel for all parties must “associate local counsel in this district” and complete an application for leave to appear pro hac vice. (7/7/23 Letter (Dkt. # 9).) On August 29, 2023, the court issued an initial scheduling order, which directed that the parties shall file a combined joint status report and discovery plan no later than October 3, 2023. (8/29/23 Sched. Order (Dkt. # 20).)

22 // 1 To date, counsel for Plaintiff Sharen Ogilvie has neither associated local counsel nor applied for leave to appear pro hac vice. (See generally Dkt.) Ms. Ogilvie therefore has not complied with the instructions set forth in the case opening letter. The court further notes that on October 3, 2023, Defendants Sanofi-Aventis US LLC and Sanofi US Services Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”) timely filed a Joint Status Report (“JSR”).

6 (JSR (Dkt. # 21).) Although the JSR states that Ms. Ogilvie and the Defendants “jointly” submitted the filing, the JSR is signed only by the Defendants’ counsel. (JSR at 1, 18.); see also Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(a) (requiring that every pleading be signed by an attorney of record for the filing party); Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b) (explaining the significance of the attorney signature requirement). The court concludes that Ms. Ogilvie has not complied with the initial scheduling order because her attorney failed to sign the JSR, a joint filing.

13 Accordingly, the court ORDERS Ms. Ogilvie to SHOW CAUSE why this case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (authorizing dismissal with prejudice for failure to prosecute); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1423 (9th Cir. 1986) (noting that a district court has “inherent power sua sponte to dismiss a case for lack of prosecution”). Ms. Ogilvie must respond to this show cause order no later than October 27, 2023. Alternatively, counsel for Ms. Ogilvie may discharge this show cause order by entering an appearance in this matter or by applying for leave to appear pro hac vice by October 27, 2023. Failure to timely respond to this order to show cause may result in the dismissal of this action with prejudice. See // Henderson, 779 F.2d at 1423 (discussing factors that the court considers in determining whether to dismiss for failure to prosecute).

3 The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff’s counsel.

4 Dated this 6th day of October.

A JAMES L. ROBART 6 United States District Judge