Opinion
2:21-cv-00738-JAD-NJK 2:21-cv-00740-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00741-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00742-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00743-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00744-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00745-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00746-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00747-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00748-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00749-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00750-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00751-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00752-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00753-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00754-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00755-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00756-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00757-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00758-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00759-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00760-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00761-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00762-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00763-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00764-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00766-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00767-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00769-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00771-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00772-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00774-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00775-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00776-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00777-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00778-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00779-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00780-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00781-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00782-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00783-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00784-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00785-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00786-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00789-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00790-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00791-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00792-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00793-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00794-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00795-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00796-APG-NJK 2:21- cv-00797-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00798-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00800-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00801-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00802-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00803-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00804-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00805-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00806-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00807-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00808-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00809-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00810-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00811-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00812-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00813-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00814-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00815-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00816-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00817-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00818-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00819-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00820-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00821-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00823-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00824-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00825-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00826-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00827-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00828-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00829-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00830-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00832-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00833-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00834-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00836-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00838-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00840-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00841-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00842-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00845-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00846-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00847-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00849-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00850-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00851-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00852-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00853-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00854-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00855-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00856-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00857-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00858-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00859-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00860-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00861-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00862-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00863-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00864-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00865-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00866-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00867-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00868-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00869-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00870-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00871-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00872-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00873-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00874-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00875-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00876-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00877-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00878-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00879-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00880-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00881-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00882-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00883-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00884-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00886-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00887-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00888-JAD-NJK 2:21- cv-00895-JAD-NJK
08-03-2021
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
NANCY J. KOPPE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
This is one of 140 cases initiated by Hank Falstad, who identifies himself as an ADA architect. In its order dated May 7, 2021, the Court required Plaintiff to take action should Plaintiff wish to continue with the ligation. In particular, Plaintiff was required to file an amended complaint properly signed either by Plaintiff or by a licensed attorney. In addition, Plaintiff was required to either pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. The deadline for compliance was set at June 7, 2021. The Court warned that failure to comply with that order may result in dismissal of the case. To date, Plaintiff has not complied with these requirements.
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure mandate that a complaint initiating a case must be signed by the plaintiff herself or by her attorney. Fed.R.Civ.P. 11(a). “The court must strike an unsigned paper unless the omission is promptly corrected after being called to the attorney's or party's attention.” Id. Moreover, initiating a federal lawsuit generally requires the payment of a filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1914(a). To the extent a plaintiff cannot afford to pay the filing fee, she must file an application to proceed in forma pauperis. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a). When a plaintiff does not pay the filing fee or file an application to proceed in forma pauperis, the case may be dismissed. See, e.g., Desai v. Biden, 2021 WL 38169, at *1 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2021), adopted, 2021 WL 276236 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2021).
As noted above, there is not a properly signed complaint in this case and that defect has not been cured despite an opportunity to do so. Moreover, Plaintiff has not paid the filing fee or filed an application to proceed in forma pauperis.
The undersigned finds that dismissal without prejudice is appropriate under the circumstances. A Court may dismiss an action based on a party's failure to prosecute her case or obey an order. See, e.g., Ferdik v. Bonzelet, 963 F.2d 1258, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 1992); Malone v. U.S. Postal Service, 833 F.2d 128, 130 (9th Cir. 1987); Henderson v. Duncan, 779 F.2d 1421, 1424 (9th Cir. 1986). In determining whether to dismiss an action on one of these grounds, the Court must consider: (1) the public's interest in expeditious resolution of litigation; (2) the Court's need to manage its docket; (3) the risk of prejudice to the defendants; (4) the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits; and (5) the availability of less drastic alternatives. E.g., Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1260-61.
These factors weigh in favor of dismissal here. The first two factors, the public's interest in expeditiously resolving this litigation and the Court's interest in managing its docket, weigh in favor of dismissal. The third factor, risk of prejudice to Defendants, also weighs in favor of dismissal because a presumption of injury arises from the occurrence of unreasonable delay in filing a pleading ordered by the court or prosecuting an action. See Anderson v. Air West, 542 F.2d 522, 524 (9th Cir. 1976). A Court's warning to a party that its failure to obey an order will result in dismissal satisfies the fifth factor's “consideration of alternatives” requirement, see, e.g., Ferdik, 963 F.2d at 1262, and that warning was given here. The fourth factor, the public policy favoring disposition of cases on their merits, is greatly outweighed by the factors favoring dismissal.
Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that this case be DISMISSED without prejudice.
NOTICE
This report and recommendation is submitted to the United States District Judge assigned to this case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). A party who objects to this report and recommendation must file a written objection supported by points and authorities within fourteen days of being served with this report and recommendation. Local Rule IB 3-2(a). Failure to file a timely objection may waive the right to appeal the district court's order. Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153, 1157 (9th Cir. 1991).