Reybol v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

Background

Arcelio Joseph Reybol filed this civil action against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., paid the filing fee, and represented himself. Although the action was filed on October 27, 2023, Reybol did not file a proposed summons or serve the defendant with the summons and complaint.

On February 22, 2024, the court ordered Reybol to file a proposed summons and serve the defendant. The court gave him until March 14, 2024, to comply. He did not file the proposed summons, serve the defendant, or otherwise communicate with the court.

Reasoning

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) permits a court to dismiss an action when a plaintiff fails to prosecute it or fails to comply with a court order. The court evaluated five factors: the public interest in resolving cases promptly, the court’s need to manage its docket, possible prejudice to the defendant, the public policy favoring decisions on the merits, and whether less severe sanctions were available.

The court concluded that four of the five factors supported dismissal. Reybol’s failure to act delayed the case and used court resources. The delay caused by his failure to prosecute also weighed in favor of finding prejudice to the defendant. The court had already warned Reybol that failing to file the proposed summons would result in dismissal, so it found that it had considered less severe sanctions. The policy favoring decisions on the merits weighed against dismissal.

Disposition

The court concluded that four factors strongly favored dismissal and DISMISSED the action without prejudice. The clerk was directed to close the action.

Effect of the ruling

The order ended this action at the district court based on Reybol’s failure to prosecute and comply with the court’s order. The opinion does not decide the underlying claims against JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.