Love v. Hassan
- James Donato
- 3:19-cv-01871
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 1
In Love v. Hassan, Judge Donato dismissed the case with prejudice because Samuel Love failed to prosecute it.
Samuel Love’s case was dismissed with prejudice; the opinion states that Mogeeb M. Hassan had not appeared.
What happened
In Love v. Hassan, Samuel Love’s case was recommended for dismissal because he did not move it forward. Mogeeb M. Hassan had not appeared in the case.
The magistrate judge had issued multiple warnings, orders requiring Love to explain the delay, and monetary sanctions. Love filed no objections to the recommendation before the deadline.
Judge James Donato adopted the recommendation in full and dismissed the case with prejudice for failure to prosecute, relying on the court’s inherent power to do so.
The detailed version
- Love v. Hassan · No. 3:19-cv-01871
- James Donato
- July 27, 2021
Background
Samuel Love sued Mogeeb M. Hassan. The opinion states that Hassan had not appeared in the action.
Report and Recommendation
Magistrate Judge Sallie Kim recommended dismissing the case for Love’s failure to prosecute, meaning failure to move the case forward. The report described multiple admonishments, orders requiring Love to show cause, and monetary sanctions issued by the magistrate judge.
No objections were filed, and the time for filing objections under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b) had expired.
Ruling
The court adopted the report and recommendation in full. It exercised its inherent power to dismiss the case with prejudice for lack of prosecution and entered the order stating, “IT IS SO ORDERED.”
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.