Xu Li and Bright Life International Inc. v. Kristi Noem, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA XU LI and BRIGHT LIFE INTERNATIONAL Case No. 2:23-cv-01931-TMC INC.,, ORDER DISMISSING PLAINTIFF BRIGHT 9 LIFE INTERNATIONAL’S CLAIMS Plaintiffs, WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO 10 PROSECUTE v. KRISTI NOEM, et al., Defendants.

14 On August 4, 2025, Judge Pechman granted Plaintiffs’ counsel’s motion to withdraw.

15 Dkt. 29. Plaintiffs were informed that although plaintiff Xu Li, an individual, may represent himself pro se, plaintiff Bright Life International Inc. (“Bright Life”), a corporation, may not.

17 Dkt. 31 at 2 (citing Rowland v. California Men's Colony, Unit II Men's Advisory Council, 506 18 U.S. 194, 202 (1993)). Judge Pechman issued an order on September 11, 2025, requiring substitute counsel to appear on behalf of Bright Life within 30 days, or the “Court will dismiss Bright Life’s claims for failure to prosecute under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).” Id. 21 The deadline has passed, and substitute counsel for Bright Life has not appeared.

22 Accordingly, the Court dismisses all of Bright Life’s claims without prejudice for failure to prosecute. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) (allowing for involuntary dismissal for failure to prosecute or failure to comply with the federal rules or court orders); Hells Canyon Pres. Council v. U.S. Forest Serv., 403 F.3d 683, 689 (9th Cir. 2005) (courts may dismiss cases sua sponte pursuant to Rule 41(b) for failure to prosecute); Oliva v. Sullivan, 958 F.2d 272, 274 (9th Cir. 1992) (“The district judge has an obligation to warn the plaintiff that dismissal is imminent.”).

5 The Clerk is directed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.

7 Dated this 17th day of October, 2025.

A Tiffany M. Cartwright 10 United States District Judge