Long v. Marin County Sheriff John Does 1-4
- 3:22-cv-06106
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Long v. Marin County Sheriff John Does 1-4, the court ordered a response explaining why the case should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Jeffrey L. Long, who was required to respond and provide service addresses, and the defendant Marin County Sheriff John Does 1-4, whose service had not yet been attempted.
What happened
In Long v. Marin County Sheriff John Does 1-4, Jeffrey L. Long did not respond by February 2, 2023, to an order requiring addresses where the defendants could be served. Because Long was authorized to proceed without paying filing fees, the United States Marshals would serve the complaint, but they needed those addresses.
The court issued an order requiring Long to explain why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failing to prosecute the case. The order did not dismiss the case at that time.
The court required Long to file a statement of no more than two pages by February 24, 2023, and to provide by then the addresses needed for service. The opinion is signed by a United States District Judge, but the judge’s name is not clear in the provided text.
The detailed version
- Long v. Marin County Sheriff John Does 1-4 · No. 3:22-cv-06106
- Feb. 6, 2023
Background
On January 20, 2023, the court ordered Jeffrey L. Long to provide addresses where each defendant could be served. The court explained that, because Long had been authorized to proceed without paying filing fees, the United States Marshals would serve the complaint. The Marshals needed the defendants’ addresses to attempt service. Long’s deadline to respond was February 2, 2023, but he had not responded by the date of this order.
Court’s action
The court explained that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits dismissal when a plaintiff fails to prosecute an action or comply with court rules or an order. The court also stated that a district court may dismiss a case on its own authority for failure to prosecute, without waiting for a defendant to file a motion.
The court ordered Long to show cause, meaning to explain, why the case should not be dismissed without prejudice for failure to prosecute. Long was ordered to file a statement of no more than two pages by February 24, 2023, and to provide by that same date the addresses at which each defendant could be served. The provided opinion does not show a later dismissal or any ruling on the underlying claims.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.