Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
Back to docket
N.D. Cal.Procedural orderFiled Apr. 11, 2022

Barge v. Ken Bett's Towing Company

Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Docket
3:21-cv-02558
Court
U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureMotion to Dismiss
In one sentence

In Barge v. Horwitz, Judge Gilliam ordered Barge to explain why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failing to provide service addresses.

Who this affects

Melissa Barge was required to explain her failure to respond and provide service addresses for each defendant. The defendants were affected because service of the amended complaint could not be attempted without their addresses.

What happened

Melissa Barge was allowed to proceed without paying filing fees, so the United States Marshals Service was responsible for serving her amended complaint. The Marshals needed addresses for the defendants.

The court had ordered Barge to provide those addresses by March 23, 2022, but she had not responded by the date of this order. The court explained that a case may be dismissed when a plaintiff fails to prosecute or obey a court order.

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. ordered Barge to show cause by April 25, 2022, in a statement of no more than two pages, why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice. He also required her to provide service addresses for each defendant by that date. The order did not itself dismiss the case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Barge v. Ken Bett's Towing Company · No. 3:21-cv-02558
Judge
Haywood Gilliam
Date
Apr. 11, 2022

Background

Melissa Barge had been authorized to proceed without prepaying filing fees. The court therefore directed the United States Marshals Service to serve her First Amended Complaint. To attempt service, the Marshals needed addresses where each defendant could be served.

On March 10, 2022, the court ordered Barge to provide those addresses. The deadline was March 23, 2022. The order states that Barge had not responded by April 11, 2022.

Court’s analysis

The court cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b), which permits dismissal when a plaintiff fails to prosecute a case or comply with the federal rules or a court order. The court also explained that a district court may dismiss a case on its own initiative for failure to prosecute, without waiting for a defendant to file a motion.

Ruling

Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. ordered Barge to show cause—meaning to explain—why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Barge was ordered to file a statement of no more than two pages by April 25, 2022. She was also required to provide, by that same date, addresses where each defendant could be served.

The order was not a dismissal. It set a deadline and warned that dismissal without prejudice could follow. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.