Toby Masse v. Clark County, et al.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA TOBY MASSE, Case No. 3:25-cv-05839-TMC Plaintiff, ORDER DISMISSING COMPLAINT WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO v. PROSECUTE CLARK COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

14 On September 18, 2025, pro se plaintiff Toby Masse filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) and attached a copy of his proposed complaint. Dkts. 1, 1-1. On September 23, 2025, Magistrate Judge Theresa L. Fricke granted Mr. Masse’s application to proceed IFP but recommended review of the complaint because “it does not appear Plaintiff has met the criteria for IFP required under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b).” Dkt. 3 at 1. On November 3, 2025, Judge Fricke’s order—which had been mailed to Mr. Masse’s address in Vancouver, Washington—was returned to the Court as undeliverable. Dkt. 5.

21 On November 5, 2025, the Court reviewed Mr. Masse’s complaint under § 1915 and found that it did not state a plausible claim for relief. Dkt. 6. The Court outlined the deficiencies in Mr. Masse’s claims and granted him 21 days to amend the complaint or face dismissal.

Dkt. 6 at 4.1 3 The deadline has passed, and Mr. Masse did not amend his complaint. Therefore, the Court dismisses this case 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.”).

10 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.

13 Dated this 12th day of December, 2025. a Tiffany M. Cartwright 16 United States District Judge 1 This order was also returned as undeliverable on December 9, 2025. Dkt. 7. Under Local Rule 41(b)(2), Mr. Masse “bears the burden of keeping the court apprised of any changes in his mailing address.” Carey v. King, 856 F.2d 1439, 1440 (9th Cir. 1988).