Opinion
ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
ROGER T. BENITEZ, District Judge.
This case comes before the Court on appeal from an order of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California. On May 30, 2014, the Court issued a briefing schedule. (Docket No. 2). The Court ordered that a record of appeal be filed no later than July 3, 2014. Appellant Shazad Berenjian was directed to serve and file an opening brief with supporting evidence no later than August 4, 2014. As of this date, no opening brief has been filed. On August 11, 2014, this Court issued an Order to Show Cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. (Docket No. 4). Appellant was required to file a brief no later than August 20, 2014. The Court specifically warned Appellant that failure to file a timely response would result in dismissal of the appeal. No brief has been filed as of this date.
Upon examination of the record, the Court determines that dismissal is appropriate. As Appellant has made no effort to brief this matter, the expeditious resolution of litigation and this Court's interest in controlling its docket favor dismissal. See Malone v. United States Postal Serv., 833 F.2d 128, 130-31 (9th Cir. 1987). Appellant has provided no excuse for the delay, or opposed the dismissal of this case. Allowing this matter to linger indefinitely threatens to prejudice Appellees, and would not serve the public policy in favor of resolution of cases on the merits. See id. There does not appear to be a less drastic sanction available, as Appellant has not provided any excuse or indicated any desire to continue to prosecute this matter. See id. Accordingly, this appeal is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to comply with this Court's deadlines. The Clerk of the Court may close the case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.